HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-06-16 PacketPage 1 of 6
City Council
Regular Meeting
AGENDA
Register for Ukiah City Council Regular Meeting at:
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/rt/3862698010362077965
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the
webinar. Alternatively, you may view the meeting (without participating) by clicking on the name of the
meeting at www.cityofukiah.com/meetings.
June 16, 2021 6:00 PM
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS
4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
5.a. Approval of the Minutes for the June 2, 2021, Special Meeting.
Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes of June 2, 2021, a Special Meeting, as submitted.
Attachments:
1.20210602 Draft Minutes Special Meeting
5.b. Approval of the Minutes for the June 2, 2021, Regular Meeting.
Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes of June 2, 2021, a Regular Meeting, as submitted.
Attachments:
1.20210602 Draft Minutes Regular Meeting
5.c. Approval of the Minutes for the June 3, 2021, Special Meeting.
Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes of June 3, 2021, a Special Meeting, as submitted.
Attachments:
1.20210603 Draft Minutes Special Meeting
6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION
Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The
City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time
within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged.
Page 1 of 550
Page 2 of 6
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council.
Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will
be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will
approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations.
7.a. Report of Disbursements for the Month of May 2021.
Recommended Action: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the Month of May 2021.
Attachments:
1.May 2021 Summary of Disbursements
2.Account Codes for Reference
3.Object codes for Reference
4.May 2021 Disbursement Detail
7.b. Approval of a Transfer in the Amount of $15,198 from the General Fund 100 to the Golf Fund
720 for the Golf Course Storm Drain Project Specification 1907.
Recommended Action: Approve a transfer in the amount of $15,197.16 from the General Fund 100
to the Golf Fund 720 for the Golf Course Storm Drain Project Specification 1907.
Attachments:
1.Combined ASRs
7.c. Report of Disposition of Surplus Materials, Used Equipment, and Supplies.
Recommended Action: Receive and file report regarding the disposition of surplus materials,
used equipment, and supplies.
Attachments:
1.Sold Assets
7.d. Notification of Publishing Services Agreement by Ukiah Daily Journal for Fiscal Year
2021/2022, in the Amount of $6.25 per Column Inch for the First Insertion and $4.26 per
Column Inch for Each Subsequent Insertion of the Same Advertisement.
Recommended Action: Receive and approve notification/agreement of the legal publishing
services of Ukiah Daily Journal for fiscal year 2021/2022, in the amount of $6.25 per column inch
for the first issue and $4.26 per column inch for additional issues.
Attachments:
1.Legal contractCity of Ukiah eff 20212022
7.e. Approve a Four (4) Year Cooperative Agreement with the California Department of Forestry
and Fire Protection for Fire and Emergency Medical Dispatching Services, for an Amount not to
Exceed $356,303.00 per Year.
Recommended Action: Approve a four (4) year cooperative agreement with the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL Fire) for fire and emergency medical
dispatching services, in an amount not to exceed $356,303.00 per year, and authorize the City
Manager to sign.
Attachments:
1.CAL Fire Dispatch 721 to 625
Page 2 of 550
Page 3 of 6
7.f. Approval of InterFund Loan and Corresponding Budget Amendment for the Street and Tree
Lighting Portion of the Streetscape Project.
Recommended Action: Approve setting up an interfund loan and corresponding budget
amendment for the Street and Tree Lighting portion of the Streetscape project.
Attachments:
1.Change Order
7.g. Authorize City Manager to Enter Agreement with Redwood Valley Calpella Fire District for the
Sale and Placement of a 60' Pole from the Electric Utility.
Recommended Action: Authorize City Manager to enter into an agreement with Redwood Valley
Calpella Fire District for the sale and placement of a 60' pole from the Electric Utility.
Attachments:
1.UTILITY POLE SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT
7.h. Authorize the City Manager to Execute All Agreements Necessary to Accept the Distribution of
the U.S. Department of the Treasury American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 Coronavirus Local
Fiscal Recovery Funds.
Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to execute all agreements necessary to accept
the distribution of the U.S. Department of the Treasury American Rescue Plan Act of 2021
Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery funds.
Attachments:
1.ARP Required Forms
2.SLFRPFAQ as of 61021
8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NONAGENDA ITEMS
The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in,
you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you
may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not
more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in
which the subject is not listed on the agenda.
9. COUNCIL REPORTS
10. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM)
11.a. Consideration and Possible Introduction of an Ordinance by Title Only to Add Section 9004 to
Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 1 to Require Compliance with the 2020 Ukiah Municipal Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP).
Recommended Action: Introduce the Ordinance by title only to add Section 9004 to Division 9,
Chapter 2, Article 1 to require compliance with the Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan.
Attachments:
1.UKI ALUCP ADOPTED May 20, 2021 COMPLETE PRINT FILE
2.ALUC Revised ISND
3.UKI ALUCP Compatibility Map
4.Draft Ordinance UKIALUCP
Page 3 of 550
Page 4 of 6
12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
12.a. Receive Status Report and Consider Any Action or Direction Related to the Novel Coronavirus
(COVID19) Emergency Including Operational Preparedness and Response; Continuity of City
Operations and Services; Community and Business Impacts; and Any Other Related Matters.
Recommended Action: Receive status report and consider any action or direction related to the
Novel Coronavirus (COVID19) Emergency including operational preparedness and response;
continuity of City operations and services; community and business impacts; and any other
related matters.
Attachments: None
12.b. Approval and Adoption of 202122 Fiscal Year City Budget through Resolution, FiveYear
Capital Improvement Plan, the Gann Limit Resolution, Associated Financial and Debt
Management Policy Resolutions, and Budget Agreement with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation
District.
Recommended Action: Taken Separately:
1. Approve and adopt budget resolution for the fiscal year 202122,
2. Approve and adopt Gann Limit resolution for fiscal year 202122,
3. Approve (in substantial form) and authorize City Manager to sign fiscal year 202122 budget
agreement with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District,
4. Approve and adopt Financial Management Policy resolution, and
5. Approve and adopt Debt Management Policy resolution.
Attachments:
1.FY 2122 Budget Resolution
2.CIP 5 yearFYE 2022 In Progress Working Final Draft 06072021
3.Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Justifications FY 2122revised
4.Gann Limit Resolution 2022
5.Budget Agreement with UVSD, Draft 61021
6.Financial Management Policy Resolution Combined
7.Financial Management (PR39) Update 2021 line out
8.Debt Management Policy Resolution Combined
9.AR002, Debt Management Policy, update 2021 line out
12.c. Update on Emergency Repair of the Yosemite Drive Water Main and Determine that
Emergency Conditions Continue to Require the Emergency Repair.
Recommended Action: Determine that emergency conditions continue to require the repair of the
Yosemite Drive Water Main without competitive bidding.
Attachments:
1.Resolution 202063 Yosemite Drive Water Main Emergency Work
13. NEW BUSINESS
13.a. Consideration of a Response to Correspondence from the County of Mendocino Regarding
Project Homekey 2.0.
Recommended Action: Discuss and provide direction regarding a response
Attachments:
1.County of Mendocino Ltr 52721 Project Homekey 2.0
Page 4 of 550
Page 5 of 6
13.b. Receive Updates on City Council Committee and Ad Hoc Assignments, and, if Necessary,
Consider Modifications to Assignments and/or the Creation/Elimination of Ad Hoc(s).
Recommended Action: Receive report(s). The Council will consider modifications to committee
and ad hoc assignments along with the creation/elimination ad hoc(s).
Attachments:
1.2021 City Council Special Assignments
14. CLOSED SESSION CLOSED SESSION MAY BE HELD AT ANY TIME DURING THE MEETING
14.a. Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)or(4))
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (4) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9. Consideration of potential litigation arising from emergency drought declaration.
(Government Code Section 54956.9(e)(2)): (Number of potential cases: 1)
Recommended Action: Confer in Closed Session
Attachments: None
14.b. Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)or(3))
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9: (Number of potential cases: 1)
Recommended Action: Confer in Closed Session
Attachments: None
14.c. Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)or(3))
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9: (1 potential case, involving possible termination of construction contract for cause)
Recommended Action: Confer in Closed Session
Attachments: None
14.d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort v. City of Ukiah, Et Al; Case No. SCUKCVPT201870200
Recommended Action: Confer in Closed Session
Attachments: None
14.e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: City of Ukiah v. Questex, LTD, et al, Mendocino County Superior Court, Case
No. SCUK CVPT1566036
Recommended Action: Confer in Closed Session
Attachments: None
Page 5 of 550
Page 6 of 6
14.f. Conference with Real Property Negotiators
(Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.8)
Property: APN Nos: 15705003, 15706002, 15705004, 15705003, 15703002, 157050
01, 15705002, 15705010, 15705009, 15707001, 15707002, 00319001
Negotiator: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager;
Negotiating Parties: Dave Hull and Ric Piffero
Under Negotiation: Price & Terms of Payment
Recommended Action: Confer in Closed Session
Attachments: None
14.g. Conference with Labor Negotiator (54957.6)
Agency Representative: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Employee Organizations: All Bargaining Units
Recommended Action: Confer in Closed Session
Attachments: None
15. ADJOURNMENT
Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed
in order for you to attend. The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon
request. Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public
inspection at the front counter at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482, during normal business hours, Monday through
Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main
entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this
agenda.
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Dated: 6/11/2021
Page 6 of 550
DR
A
F
T
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Special Meeting
Virtual Meeting Link: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/rt/9199312935703156493
Ukiah, CA 95482
June 2, 2021
4:00 p.m.
1.ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Ukiah City Council met at a Special Meeting on June 2, 2021, having been legally noticed
on May 27, 2021. The meeting was held virtually at the following link:
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/rt/9199312935703156493.
Mayor Orozco called the meeting to order at 4:07 p.m. Roll was taken with the following
Councilmembers Present: Douglas F. Crane, Mari Rodin, Josefina Duenas, Jim O.
Brown, and Juan V. Orozco. Staff Present: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager; and
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk.
MAYOR OROZCO PRESIDING.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Rodin.
2.AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No public comment was received.
3. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a.Presentation of the Draft 2021-22 Fiscal Year City Budget and Draft Five-Year
Capital Improvement Plan.
Presenter: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director
City-wide Overview
Presenter: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director
4. NEW BUSINESS
5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:51 p.m.
________________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
AGENDA ITEM 5a
Page 7 of 550
AGENDA ITEM 5b
Page 1 of 5
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Virtual Meeting Link: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/rt/9199312935703156493
Ukiah, CA 95482
June 2, 2021
6:00 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on June 2, 2021, having been legally noticed on May
27, 2021. The meeting was held virtually at the following link:
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/rt/9199312935703156493
Mayor Orozco called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Roll was taken with the following
Councilmembers Present: Douglas F. Crane, Mari Rodin, Josefina Dueňas, Jim O. Brown, and
Juan V. Orozco. Staff Present: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney;
and Kristine Lawler, City Clerk.
MAYOR OROZCO PRESIDING.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Orozco.
3.PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS
a.Proclamation: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, and Two-
Spirit (LGBTQIA2) Pride Month in the City of Ukiah.
Presenter: Mayor Orozco.
Proclamation was received by Jennifer Sookne, Mendocino Pride Alliance Vice Chair.
b.Presentation of the PFM Group on an Update to the City Council on the City’s Investment
Portfolio, a Discussion of Sustainable Investing, and Recommended Changes to the City's
Investment Policy.
Presenters: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director and Allison Kaune, PFM Asset Management.
Motion/Second: Brown/Rodin to accept the presentation and approve recommended revisions to
City's investment policy. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin, Duenas,
Brown, and Orozco. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
Council Consensus for the Investment Oversight Committee to research and review the process
and next steps for adopting sustainable investment strategies, and bring back recommendations to
Council.
4.PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
The City Clerk reported that all communications had been distributed.
5.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a.Approval of the Minutes for the May 19, 2021, Regular Meeting.
Page 8 of 550
City Council Minutes for June 2, 2021, Meeting Continued:
Page 2 of 5
Motion/Second: Brown/Crane to approve the Minutes of May 19, 2021, a regular meeting, as
submitted. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin, Duenas, and Orozco.
NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: Brown.
6.RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION
7.CONSENT CALENDAR
a.Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement (COU No. 2021-213) with
Governmentjobs.com, Inc. (dba "NEOGOV") for a Cloud-Based Recruiting Module in the Amount of
$39,908 for Three Years, and Approve Corresponding Budget Amendment – Human
Resources/Risk Management.
b.Report of Acquisition of Professional Services (COU No. 2021-214) from Alpha Analytical
Laboratories, Inc. in the Amount of $17,662.80 for Quarterly Water Sampling and Completion of
Chemical Examination Reports for the Ukiah Landfill – Public Works.
c.Consideration of Adoption of Resolution (2021-22) Appointing Elora Babbini to the Parks,
Recreation, and Golf Commission (PRGC) – City Clerk.
d.Approval of Notice of Completion for Yokayo Court Conduit Installation, Specification No. 20-14,
and Approval for Final Payment of the 5% Retention to Wipf Construction, LLC – Electric Utility.
e.Approve Change Order #3 to Contract 2021-176 (COU No. 2021-176-CO3) with Diamond D
Construction to Complete Penstock Drain Replacement, and Authorize Corresponding Budget
Amendment in an Amount to be Provided to the City Council Prior to the June 2, 2021, City Council
Meeting – Electric Utility.
f.Approval of Purchase of One New Caterpillar Model 304E2 Excavator to Peterson Cat of Willits,
CA in the Amount of $84,425.10 for the Water and Sewer Operations Division, and Approval of
Corresponding Budget Amendment – Water Resources.
Staff Comment: Cindy Sauers, Assistant Electric Utility Director.
Motion/Second: Brown/Crane to approve Consent Calendar Items 7a-7f, as submitted. Motion
carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin, Duenas, Brown, and Orozco. NOES:
None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
8.AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No public comments were given.
9. COUNCIL REPORTS
No reports were given.
10. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS
Presenters:
Covid Status – Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Update of Drought and Water Conditions – Sean White, Water Resources Director.
Construction Update – Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer.
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM)
a.Conduct a Public Hearing to Discuss the City of Ukiah’s 2020 Urban Water Management
Plan, and Adopt Resolutions Approving the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and
Water Shortage Contingency Plan.
Page 9 of 550
City Council Minutes for June 2, 2021, Meeting Continued:
Page 3 of 5
Presenters: Sean White, Water Resources Director and Phillip West, West & Associates.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:41 P.M.
No public comment was received.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:41 P.M.
Motion/Second: Crane/Brown to adopt Resolutions (UWMP: 2021-23 and WSCP: 2021-24)
approving the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Motion
carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin, Duenas, Brown, and Orozco. NOES:
None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a.Update on Emergency Repair of the Yosemite Drive Water Main and Determine that
Emergency Conditions Continue to Require the Emergency Repair.
Presenter: Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer.
Motion/Second: Crane/Brown to determine that emergency conditions continue to require the repair
of the Yosemite Drive Water Main without competitive bidding. Motion carried by the following roll
call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin, Duenas, Brown, and Orozco. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
b.Award a Contract to Milsoft Utility Solutions, Inc. for the Replacement of the Utility Billing
Customer Information System Software Program.
Presenters: Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager; Lori Martin, Billing & Customer Services
Manager; John Beichman and Joel Westvold, Milsoft Utility Solutions, Inc.
Motion/Second: Brown/Rodin to award contract (COU No. 2021-215) to Milsoft Utility Solutions for
the replacement of the Utility Billing's Customer Information System software program. Motion
carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin, Duenas, Brown, and Orozco. NOES:
None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
c.Approve Contract Amendment with Excergy/E Source in the Amount of $35,000 for the
Utility Billing Customer Information System Project Management Services.
Presenter: Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager.
Motion/Second: Rodin/Brown to approve contract amendment (COU No. 2021-089-A1) with
Excergy/E Source in the amount of $35,000 for the Utility Billing Customer Information System
Project Management Services. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin,
Duenas, Brown, and Orozco. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
d.Continuation of Presentation of the Draft 2021-22 Fiscal Year City Budget and Draft Five-
Year Capital Improvement Plan.
Presenter: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director.
City-wide Overview - Continued
Presenter: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director
RECESS: 8:29 – 8:37 P.M.
Page 10 of 550
City Council Minutes for June 2, 2021, Meeting Continued:
Page 4 of 5
Capital Improvement Projects
Presenter: Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager
13. NEW BUSINESS
a.Introduction of Ordinance by Title Only Amending Sections 3960 and 3962 in Article 2,
Chapter 6, Division 4 of the Ukiah City Code, Governing Apportionment of Water and
Sewer Fees to Tenants in Mobilehome Parks and Apartment Complexes.
Presenters: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director and David Rapport, City Attorney.
Motion/Second: Rodin/Brown to introduce Ordinance by title only. Motion carried by the following
roll call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin, Duenas, Brown, and Orozco. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
City Clerk, Kristine Lawler, read the following title into the record:
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTIONS 3960 and
3962 IN ARTICLE 2, CHAPTER 6, DIVISON 4 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE, GOVERNING
APPORTIONMENT OF WATER AND SEWER FEES TO TENANTS IN MOBILEHOME PARKS AND
APARTMENT COMPLEXES
Motion/Second: Rodin/Brown to introduce the Ordinance amending Sections 3960 and 3962 in
Article 2, Chapter 6, Division 4 of the Ukiah City Code, governing apportionment of Water and Sewer
Fees to Tenants in Mobilehome Parks and Apartment Complexes. Motion carried by the following
roll call votes: AYES: Crane, Rodin, Duenas, Brown, and Orozco. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
b.Receive Updates on City Council Committee and Ad Hoc Assignments and, if Necessary,
Consider Modifications to Assignments and/or the Creation/Elimination of Ad hoc(s).
No reports were received.
COUNCIL ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION AT 9:18 P.M.
14. CLOSED SESSION
a.Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) & (4))
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (4) of subdivision (d) of Section
54956.9. Consideration of potential litigation arising from emergency drought declaration.
(Government Code Section 54956.9(e)(2)): (Number of potential cases: 1)
Recommended Action: Confer in Closed Session
b.Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2 & 3))
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)(Number of
potential cases: 1)
c.Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2))
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)(Number of
potential cases: 2)
Page 11 of 550
City Council Minutes for June 2, 2021, Meeting Continued:
Page 5 of 5
d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Gerardo Magdaleno, by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Pedro Francisco
Magdaleno v. City of Ukiah, Justin Wyatt (Fed. Dist. Ct. N.D. Cal.) 3:21-2609 VC.
e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort v. City of Ukiah, Et Al; Case No. SCUK-CVPT-2018-70200
f. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort v. City of Ukiah, Et Al; Case No. SCUK-CVPT-20-74612
g. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: City of Ukiah v. Questex, LTD, et al, Mendocino County Superior Court, Case No.
SCUK- CVPT-15-66036
h. Conference with Real Property Negotiators
(Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.8)
Property: APN Nos: 157-050-03, 157-060-02, 157-050-04, 157-050-03, 157-030-02, 157-050- 01,
157-050-02, 157-050-10, 157-050-09, 157-070-01, 157-070-02, 003-190-01
Negotiator: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager;
Negotiating Parties: Dave Hull and Ric Piffero
Under Negotiation: Price & Terms of Payment
i. Conference with Real Property Negotiators
(Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.8)
Property: APNs 184-090-07-00 and 184-100-04-00
Negotiator: Sean White, Water Resources Director and Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager;
Negotiating Parties: Noble Vineyard Management
Under Negotiation: Instruction to negotiator will concern price and terms of payment.
j. Conference with Labor Negotiator (54957.6)
Agency Representative: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Employee Organizations: All Bargaining Units
Direction was given to staff.
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:43 p.m.
________________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Page 12 of 550
Page 1 of 3
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Virtual Meeting Link: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/7989553280015361551
Special Meeting
June 3, 2021
3:00 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Ukiah City Council met at a Special Meeting on June 3, 2021, having been legally noticed on May
28, 2021. The meeting was held at the following virtual link:
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/7989553280015361551
Mayor Orozco called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m. Roll was taken with the following
Councilmembers Present: Douglas F. Crane, Mari Rodin, Josefina Duenas (arriving at 3:40 p.m.),
Jim O. Brown, and Juan V. Orozco Staff Present: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager and Kristine
Lawler, City Clerk.
MAYOR OROZCO PRESIDING.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice Mayor Brown.
2. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No public comment was received.
3. UNFINISHED BUSINESS – BUDGET WORKSHOP
a.Continuation of Presentation of the Draft 2021-22 Fiscal Year City Budget and Draft Five-
Year Capital Improvement Plan.
Presenter: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director.
City Manager’s Office (3:15 p.m.)
Presenters:
City Council – Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
City Manager – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
City-Wide Administrative Services – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
Community Outreach – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
City Clerk – Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Economic Development – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
Emergency Management – Traci Boyl
Redevelopment Successor Agency – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
Human Resources/Risk Management – Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
Finance (3:47 p.m.)
Presenters:
Finance Department Overview – Dan Buffalo, Finance Director
Financial Services - Disbursements – Sarah Brown, Financial Manager
Accounting, Reporting, and Budget – Olga Keough, Finance Controller
Billing and Customer Service/Meter Readers – Lori Martin, Customer Service and Billing
Supervisor
Financial Services – Procurement, Capital and Special Projects – Mary Horger, Procurement
Manager
AGENDA ITEM 5c
Page 13 of 550
City Council Minutes for June 18, 2020, Continued:
Page 2 of 3
Information Technology – Scott Shaver, Interim I.T. Administrator and Ryan Burkhart I.T.
Manager.
City Attorney (4:18 p.m.)
Presenter: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director
City Treasurer (4:18 p.m.)
Presenter: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director
Police (4:23 p.m.)
Presenter: Noble Waidelich, Police Captain
RECESS: 4:45 - 5:00 P.M. (Councilmember Duenas returning at 5:09 p.m.)
Ukiah Valley Fire Authority (5:00 p.m.)
Presenter: Douglas Hutchison, Fire Chief
Community Services (5:31 p.m.)
Presenter: Neil Davis, Program Administrator
Alex Rorabaugh Recreation Center
Parks
Park Development
Aquatics
Golf
Building Maintenance
Conference Center
Museum
Recreation
Special Services
Community Development (6:26 p.m.)
Presenters:
Planning Services – Mireya Turner, Planning Manager
Building Services – Matt Keizer, Building Official
Housing Services – Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director
Grants Management – Neil Davis, Program Administrator
Public Works (6:35 p.m.)
Presenter: Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director / City Engineer
Fleet and Plant Management
Engineering
Corp Yard
Landfill
Streets
Airport (6:56 p.m.)
Presenter: Greg Owen, Airport Manager
Electric Utility (6:59 p.m.)
Presenters: Mel Grandi, Electric Utility Director and Cindy Sauers, Assistant Electric Utility Director
Electric Distribution
Technical Services
Electric Administration
Page 14 of 550
City Council Minutes for June 18, 2020, Continued:
Page 3 of 3
Water Resources (7:13 p.m.)
Presenter: Sean White, Water Resources Director
Water Services
Wastewater Services
Recycled Water Services
Closing remarks were given by both the Finance Director and City Manager.
4. NEW BUSINESS
5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:37 p.m.
________________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Page 15 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 7.a.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2019-82
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Report of Disbursements for the Month of May 2021.
DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Candice Rasmason, Accounts Payable
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. May 2021 Summary of Disbursements
2. Account Codes for Reference
3. Object codes for Reference
4. May 2021 Disbursement Detail
Summary: The Council will review and consider approval of the Report of Disbursements for the month of
May 2021.
Background: Payments made during the month of May 2021 are summarized on the Report of
Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the Schedule of Bills, representing the four (4) individual payment
cycles within the month.
Accounts Payable Check Numbers (City & UVFA): 3042664-3042737; 3042738-3042833; 3042834-3042891;
3042892-3042997
Accounts Payable Wire Transfers: 43
Payroll Check Numbers: 508849-508895; 508896-508942
Payroll Manual Check Numbers: N/A
Direct Deposit Numbers: 104465-104693; 104694-104929
Manual Direct Deposit Numbers: N/A
Void Check Numbers: 3041624, 3042332, 3041425
Void Direct Deposit Numbers: N/A
Discussion: This report is submitted in accordance with Ukiah City Code Division 1, Chapter 7, Article 1.
Attachment #1: May 2021 Summary of Disbursements
Attachment #2: Account Codes for Reference
Attachment #3: Object Codes for Reference
Attachment #4: May 2021 Disbursement Detail
Page 16 of 550
Page 2 of 2
Recommended Action: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the Month of May 2021.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
Page 17 of 550
Attachment 1
FUNDS:
100 General Fund $115,739.70 700 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund $9,120.21
101 GF-(Sub-Fund) Visit Ukiah 701 Landfill Corrective Fund
105 Measure S General Fund 702 Disposal Closure Reserve Fund $17,460.00
110 Special General Fund 704 Post Closure Fund - Solid Waste
120 Streets Capital Improvement $16,198.27 710 Ambulance Services Fund $1,795.08
200 City Adminstrative Services $110,596.58 720 Golf Fund $11,764.05
201 Worker's Comp Fund $289,043.00 730 Confernence Center Fund $3,152.42
202 Liability Fund 750 Visit Ukiah
203 Garage Fund $5,257.13 777 Airport Fund $59,687.36
204 Purchasing Fund $2,810.09 778 Airport Capital Improvement Fund $3,266.48
205 Billing & Collections Fund $19,271.18 779 Special Aviation Fund
206 Public Safety Dispatch Fund $1,912.51 800 Electric Fund $817,491.18
207 Payroll Posting Fund $551,642.37 801 Electric Capital Reserve Fund $424,052.18
208 Building Maintenance/Corp Yard Fund $30,123.76 803 Lake Mendocino Bond Reserve
209 IT Fund $152,895.09 805 Street Lighting Fund $12,225.53
220 Equipment Reserve Fund 806 Public Benefits Fund $5,665.17
249 City Housing Bond Proceeds 807 Electric Capital & Trade Fund
250 Special Revenue Fund $0.00 820 Water Fund $97,767.37
251 Special Projects Reserve Fund $1,437.50 822 Water Capital Improvement Fund $146,871.42
253 CITY PROP 172 $14,337.42 830 Recycled Water Fund $66,968.35
300 Park Development Fund 840 City/District Sewer Fund $108,280.84
301 Anton Stadium Fund $0.00 841 Sewer Contruction Fund
302 Observatory Park Fund 843 Sewer Capital Fund
304 Swimming Pool Fund $0.00 900 Special Deposit Trust $2,974.62
305 Riverside Park Fund $0.00 901 General Service (Accts Recv)$2,943.85
306 Skate Park Fund $0.00 902 U.S.W. Billing & Collection $50,712.10
310 Museum Grants 903 Public Safety - AB 109 $0.00
311 Alex Rorbaugh Recreation Center Fund $2,118.68 905 Federal Emergency Shelter Grant
312 Downtown Business Improvement Fund 905 Mendocino Emergency Service Authority
313 LMIHF Housing Asset Fund 911 Russian River Watershed Association
314 Winter Special Events 915 UVFD $32,717.79
315 Advanced Planning Fund $0.00 916 UVFD PROP 172 $14,337.39
500 2106 Gas Tax Fund 917 UVFD Measure B $14,294.24
501 2107 Gas Tax Fund 918 UVFD Mitigation $1,361.78
503 2105 Gas Tax Fund 940 Sanitation District Special Fund
505 Signalization Fund 942 Rate Stabilization - UVSD Fund
506 Bridge Fund 943 Sanitation District Capital Improvement Fund
507 1998 STIP Augmentation Fund 952 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund
508 SB325 Reimbursement Fund 960 Community Redevelopment Agency
509 S.T.P. Fund $389.36 961 RDA Housing Pass-Through
510 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief Fund 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund
511 Rail Trail Fund 963 Housing Debt
600 Community Development Block Grant 964 RDA Capital Pass-Through
601 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 965 Redevelopment Capital Improvement Fund
602 Community Development Fund 966 Redevelopment Debt Service
603 08-HOME-4688 967 Housing Bond Proceeds
604 CDBG Grant 09-STBG-6417 968 Non-Housing Bond Proceeds
605 11-HOME-7654 Fund $0.00 969 RDA Obligation Retirement Fund
606 CDBG Grant 10-EDEF-7261 844/944 Sewer Capital Projects Fund $15,591.56
607 Prop 84 Grant Fund
609 13-CDBG-8940
610 City RDA Projects Fund
613 Home Program Activities
630 Asset Seizure Fund $757.70
631 Asset Seizure Fund (Drug/Alcohol)Retainage Withheld
633 H & S Education 11489(B)(2)(A1)$8,000.00 611 CDBG 16-CDBG-11147
634 Federal Asset Seizure Grants
635 SUP Law Enforcement Service Fund
636 CBTHP Officer
637 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant
638 Asset Forfeiture 11470.2 H & S
639 Special Revenue - Police
640 Parking District Fund $515.04
691 Museum Fund
695 Transfer Station Fund
PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 508849-508895
DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS: 104465-104693 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS- A/P CHECKS $3,243,546.35
PAYROLL PERIOD: 4/18/21-5/1/21 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS- EFT's $243.00
PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 508896-508942 TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS & DIRECT DEPOSITS $1,029,105.33
DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS: 104694-104929 TOTAL PAYROLL EFT's (TAXES, PERS, VENDORS)$599,831.93
PAYROLL PERIOD: 5/2/21-5/15/21 * vendor name( if applicable)
PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS:
DIRECT DEPOST NUMBERS:
PAYROLL PERIOD:
VOID CHECK NUMBERS:
3041624, 3042332, 3041425 TOTAL PAYMENTS $4,872,726.61
N/A
WIRE TRANSFER NUMBERS:
43
CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK
This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on ____________________.
City Clerk
APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
I have examined this Register and approve same.I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy
and available funds.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
City Manager Director of Finance
MANUAL CHECK NUMBERS:
CITY OF UKIAH
REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS
REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS
FOR THE MONTH OF MAY
Page 18 of 550
Account Code Summary Attachment 2
10000000 General Fund 20524412 Water Department - Meter Readers
10020210 Patrol 20526430 Electric Department - Meter Readers
10020214 Police Reserves 20620231 Ukiah Dispatch
10020216 COPS Grant 20620232 Ft Bragg Dispatch
10020218 Police - CSO 20700000 Payroll Posting Fund
10020224 Police - Major Crimes Task Force 20822500 Building Maintenance
10021210 Fire Administration 20824300 Corporation Yard
10021312 Fire Volunteer Station 20913900 IT Fund
10022100 Parks 22013300 FA Replace - Finance UB
10022300 Aquatics 22020200 FA Replace - Police Operations
10022800 Recreation 22021210 FA Replace - Fire Administration
10022810 Recreation Administration 22022900 FA Replace - Information Technology
10022821 Adult Basketball 22024100 FA Replace - Garage
10022822 Adult Softball 22024220 FA Replace - Streets
10022824 Co-Ed Volleyball 22024413 FA Replace - Water Distribution Cap
10022831 Youth Basketball 22024414 FA Replace - Water Distribution O&M
10022832 Youth Softball 22024421 FA Replace - City Wastewater
10022840 Day Camp 25024210 Engineering Reserve
10022850 Classes & Clinics 25024300 Corporation Yard Reserve
10022860 Special Activities 25122900 CIP - IT
10023100 Community Planning 25123100 CIP - Planning
10023320 Building Inspection 25124210 CIP - Engineering
10024210 Engineering 25124220 CIP - Streets
10024214 Traffic Signals 25124410 CIP - Water
10024224 Storm Drains 25124421 CIP - City Wastewater
10024620 Streets 25126410 CIP - Electric
10112700 Visit Ukiah 30022200 Park Development
20010000 City Council 30122210 Anton Stadium
20012100 City Manger 30222220 Observatory Park
20012200 City-Wide Admin 30522250 Riverside Park
20012300 Community Outreach 30622260 Skate Park
20012500 City Clerk 30822280 Project Planning
20012600 Economic Development 31022700 Museum Grant
20012800 Emergency Management 31122000 Alex Rorabaugh Recreation Center
20013200 Budget Management 31217100 Downtown Business Improvement District
20013210 Accounts Payable 50524210 Engineering - Signalization Fund
20013220 Payroll 50624210 Capital Engineering
20013400 Accounting 50824210 SB325 - Engineering
20014000 City Attorney 50824220 SB325 - Streets
20015100 City Treasurer 50924210 STP - Engineering
20016100 Human Resources 50924220 STP - Streets
20112400 Worker's Compensation Fund 51024220 Trans - Traffic Slurry Seal
20212400 Liability Fund 510X9999 Trans -Traffic Project
20324100 Garage Fund 60217441 Grant - CDBG 602
20413500 Purchasing Fund 60317442 Grant - HOME 603
20513300 Billing and Collections 60417441 Grant - CDBG 604
20514000 Billing and Collections - City Attorney 60517442 Grant - HOME 605
Page 19 of 550
Account Code Summary Attachment 2
60517462 FTHB Activity Delivery 60517461 First Time Homebuyer Program
60517467 FTHB - PIR 80026130 Electric Substation
60600000 CDBG Grant 10-EDEF-7261 Fund 80026140 Reimbursable Work for Others
60617441 Grant - CDBG 606 80026200 Electric Metering
60617451 General Administration 80026300 Electric Generation
60617452 AD ED Direct Financial Assistance 80026312 Mendocino Hydro
60617453 ED Direct Financial Assistance 80026330 Hydro Electric
60717443 Grant Prop 84 80026400 Electric Administration
60724413 Prop 84 Water Distribution Cap 80026410 Electric General Administration
60900000 13-CDBG-8940 80026430 Interdepartmental Charges
60917458 13-CDBG-8940 80326330 Hydro Plant
63020210 Asset Seizure Expenditure 80526610 Street Lighting
63120210 Drug & Alcohol Education 80626500 Public Benefit
63320210 H&S Asset Seizure Expenditure 82027110 Water
63420250 Fed Asset Seizure Expenditure 82027111 Water - Production O&M
63520210 SLESF 82027113 Water - Distribution Capital
63820210 Asset Forfeiture 11470 82027114 Water - Distribution O&M
64020213 Parking Enforcement 82027115 Water - Production Capital
69122700 Museum 82227113 Water - Distribution Capital
70024500 Landfill 700 84027220 Wastewater
70224500 Landfill Closure 84027221 Wastewater City - O&M
70424500 Landfill Post closure 84027222 Wastewater City - Capital
72022400 Golf 84027225 Wastewater Treatment - O&M
73022600 Conference Center 84027226 Wastewater Treatment - Capital
75017110 Visit Ukiah 84227220 Wastewater
77725200 Airport Operations 84327222 Wastewater City - Capital
77817411 FAA Grant 84427221 Wastewater City Capital - O&M
80026100 Electric Administration 84427222 Wastewater City - Capital
80026110 Electric Overhead 90000000 Special Deposit Trust Fund
80026120 Electric Underground 91190100 Russian River Watershed Assoc
80100000 Infrastructure 96900000 Successor Agency
Page 20 of 550
12102 INVENTORY OF SUPPLIES 52526 FRAUD INVEST. ASSESSMENT
12103 STORES PURCHASES 52527 A.D.P. PREMIUM & DEDUCTIBLE
12104 INVENTORY - PURCHASES 52528 LIABILITY INSURANCE
12105 STORES ISSUES 52529 EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD PREMIUMS
51211 PERS UNFUNDED LIABILITY 52530 POLLUTION-ENVIRON INS PREMIUM
51280 OVERTIME/CALLOUT MEALS 52531 UMEMPLOY. INS EXPENSE
51285 CALLOUT MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS 52532 SAFETY & TRAINING SUPPORT
52100 CONTRACTED SERVICES 52600 RENT
52107 CONTRACTED SERVICES-EIR 52841 SUCCESSOR AGENCY ADMIN
52108 CONTRACT SERVICES-GPU 54100 SUPPLIES
52110 AMBULANCE BILLING 54101 POSTAGE
52111 MAINT. CONTRCTS - DEFIBRULATOR 54102 SMALL TOOLS
52112 M. S. OVERSIGHT 54105 PHOTOGRAPHIC EXPENSE
52113 PLANNING STUDIES 54106 SPECIALTY SUPPLIES
52114 COMPLIANCE STUDIES 54120 PW - SPECIAL SUPPLIES
52120 LABOR CHARGES FROM OTHER DEPAR 54121 PW - ASPHALT CONCRETE
52130 EDUCATIONAL & MARKETING MATL'S 54122 PW - AGGREGATE BASE
52131 ASSISTANCE TO SENIORS 54123 PW - CRACK SEALANT
52132 EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE 54124 PW - CONCRETE/SUPPLIES
52133 MONTHLY DISCOUNT PROGRAM 54125 PW - TRAFFIC PAINT
52134 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION 54126 PW-PREMARKS
52135 ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM 54127 PW - SIGN POSTS/SHEETING
52136 PHOTOVOLTAIC RATES/INCENTIVE 54128 PW - COLD PATCH MATERIAL
52137 PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM MGMT 54129 PW - TACK OIL
52138 NCPA PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM 54130 PW - SAFETY
52139 RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & DEMO 54131 PW - BARRICADES & CONES
52140 LITIGATION EXPENSES 54160 HR - CITY LIABILITY & CONTRACT
52145 DETACHMENT-SEWER-UVSD 54161 HR - BACKGROUND & PHYSICALS
52150 LEGAL SERVICES/EXPENSES 54162 HR - ADVERTISING
52151 AFLAC & PERS INSUR ADMIN FEES 54163 HR - INTERVIEW SUPPLIES
52170 UKIAH WASTE SOLUTIONS 54164 HR - FORMS & OTHER DIV. EXP.
52171 RESIDENTIAL BILLING CHARGE 54165 HR - NEW EMPLOYEE FINGERPRINT
52172 COMMERCIAL OVERSIGHT FEE 54166 HR - DOT TESTING PROGRAM
52180 SECURITY SERVICES 54167 HR - EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT
52301 PROPERTY TAX ADMIN FEE 54168 HR - REMIF SAFETY TRNG & SUPPO
52302 AMBULANCE FEES 54201 PRISONER EXPENSE
52303 REHIT SUPPORT 54202 MAJOR CRIME INVETIGATIONS
52304 LAFCO FEES AND PROP TAX EXP 54320 SOFTWARE
52500 TRUSTEE FEES 54330 COMPUTER AND TECHNOLOGY
52510 ADVERTISING & PROMOTION 54500 EQUIP RENTS AND LEASES
52515 ADVERTISING & PUBLICATION 54700 FINES & PENALTIES
52521 LIABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM 55100 TELEPHONE
52522 LIABILITY INSURANCE DEDUCT 55200 PG&E
52523 BOILER/MACHINERY PREMIUMS 55210 UTILITIES
52524 PROPERTY INSURANCE 56100 VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT MAINT. & R
52525 WORKER'S COMP. EXPENSE 56110 CITY GARAGE - PARTS
Object Code Summary Attachment 3
Page 21 of 550
56121 R & M RADIO EQUIPMENT 56111 CITY GARAGE - LABOR
56122 R & M NON-AUTO EMS EQUIPMENT 56112 EQUIPMENT PARTS FOR RESALE
56123 R & M COMPUTERS 56120 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR
56124 MAINT CONTRACT DEFIBULATORS 80235 SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
56130 EXTERNAL SERVICES 80236 EMERGENCY/CONTINGENCY
56210 FUEL & FLUIDS 90100 LOAN PROCEEDS
56300 BUILDING MAINT. & REPAIR 90101 LOAN PAYMENT RECEIVED
56410 EQUIPMENT RENTAL - PRIVATE 90301 LOAN REPAYMENT
56504 FACILITY MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 90410 BOND PROCEEDS
56600 AIRFIELD MAINTENANCE & REPAIR
56700 LANDFILL CLOSURE EXPENSE
57100 CONFERENCE & TRAINING
57101 CONF & TRAINING-AQUATICS
57102 CONF & TRAINING-PARKS STAFF
57200 MEETINGS
57300 MEMBERSHIPS & SUBSCRIPTIONS
58101 NCPA PLANT GENERATION
58102 NCPA POWER PURCHASES
58103 NCPA TRANSMISSION
58104 NCPA MANAGEMENT SERVICES
58105 NCPA THIRD PARTY SALES
58106 NCPA PASS THROUGH COSTS
58107 NCPA COMMITMENTS ACTIVITY
58201 WATER PURCHASES
58202 WATER TREATMENT PLANT CHEMICAL
58401 AVIATION FUEL
58410 GARAGE LUBRICANTS & PARTS
58510 REIMBRSABLE JOBS
59100 PROPERTY TAXES PAID
59101 FEES
59102 FRANCHISE FEES
59350 PURCHASE DISCOUNTS TAKEN
59400 OTHER EXPENSES
70101 LOAN PAYMENTS MADE
70102 BOND INTEREST PAYMENTS
70110 BOND ISSUANCE COSTS
70201 LOAN PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS
70202 BOND PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS
80100 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT
80200 BUILDINGS ACQUISITION
80210 LAND ACQUISITION
80220 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS
80230 INFRASTRUCTURE
80231 RECYCLING STUDY 50% GRANT MATC
80232 LINE REPLACEMENTS
80233 MAIN REPLACEMENTS
80234 INFLOW/INFILTRATION
Page 22 of 550
ATTACHMENT 4
Page 23 of 550
Page 24 of 550
Page 25 of 550
Page 26 of 550
Page 27 of 550
Page 28 of 550
Page 29 of 550
Page 30 of 550
Page 31 of 550
Page 32 of 550
Page 33 of 550
Page 34 of 550
Page 35 of 550
Page 36 of 550
Page 37 of 550
Page 38 of 550
Page 39 of 550
Page 40 of 550
Page 41 of 550
Page 42 of 550
Page 43 of 550
Page 44 of 550
Page 45 of 550
Page 46 of 550
Page 47 of 550
Page 48 of 550
Page 49 of 550
Page 50 of 550
Page 51 of 550
Page 52 of 550
Page 53 of 550
Page 54 of 550
Page 55 of 550
Page 56 of 550
Page 57 of 550
Page 58 of 550
Page 59 of 550
Page 60 of 550
Page 61 of 550
Page 62 of 550
Page 63 of 550
Page 64 of 550
Page 65 of 550
Page 66 of 550
Page 67 of 550
Page 68 of 550
Page 69 of 550
Page 70 of 550
Page 71 of 550
Page 72 of 550
Page 73 of 550
Page 74 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 7.b.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2021-918
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of a Transfer in the Amount of $15,198 from the General Fund 100 to the Golf Fund 720
for the Golf Course Storm Drain Project Specification 19-07.
DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager
PRESENTER:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Combined ASRs
Summary: Council will consider approving a transfer in the amount of $15,198 from the General Fund 100 to
the Golf Fund 720 for the Golf Course Storm Drain Project Specification 19-07.
Background: In May of 2020, Council awarded a bid in the amount of $114,671 to T&T Paving Inc., dba
Valley Paving for the Golf Course Storm Drain Project, Specification No. 19-07. In August of 2020, Council
approved filing of the Notice of Completion for the project, with a final project amount of $162,093.36. Please
see Attachment 1 for a copy of the Agenda Summary Reports.
Discussion: Originally, the reimbursement anticipated was 75% from FEMA, and 18.75% from CalOES of
total project costs. The balance of the costs would be supplemented by a transfer from the General Fund.
The actual reimbursement approved and subsequently received was 67.5% from FEMA, and 16.88% from
CalOES of total project costs. Therefore, staff is requesting approval for additional funds to be transferred
from the General Fund (100) to the Golf Fund (720) in the amount of $15,198 to cover the reimbursement
shortfall.
The total cost from the General Fund for this project, if the transfer is approved, will be $25,327.36.
Recommended Action: Approve a transfer in the amount of $15,197.16 from the General Fund 100 to the
Golf Fund 720 for the Golf Course Storm Drain Project Specification 19-07.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 10000000.95720: $2,247.20; 72000000.91100: -$2,247.20
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 10000000.95720: $17,445.20; 72000000.91100: -$17,445.20
FINANCING SOURCE: General Fund
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: 1920-255
COORDINATED WITH: Maya Simerson, Project & Grant Administrator; Olga Keough, Controller; Tami
Bartolomei, Emergency Management Administrator
Page 75 of 550
Page 2 of 2
Page 76 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 7.i.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/20/2020
ITEM NO: 2020-402
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Award Bid to T&T Paving Inc., dba Valley Paving in the Amount of $114,671 for the Golf Course
Storm Drain Project, Specification No. 19-07, and approval of corresponding budget amendment.
DEPARTMENT:Public Works PREPARED BY:Andrew Stricklin, Engineering Analyst
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1.Spec 19-07 Golf Course Storm Drain
2.Bid_Results_Export (23)
3.Bid from Schaefer Engineering
4.Subletting and Subcontracting
5.Bid from Valley Paving
6.Valley Paving - Sub-contractor DIR number correction
Summary: The City Council will consider declaring the bid from Schaefer Engineer Inc. as non-responsive,
rejecting the bid, and awarding the contract to T&T Paving Inc., dba Valley Paving in the Amount of $114,671
for the Golf Course Storm Drain Project, Specification No. 19-07, and approval of corresponding budget
amendment.
Background: As a result of the February storms in 2019, significant damages were made to a storm drain
located at the Ukiah Valley Golf Course. The City's Office of Emergency Management Coordinator submitted
necessary documents to FEMA for reimbursement for damages caused by the winter storm. After FEMA and
Cal OES visited the site to assess the damages, they agreed the damages were a result of the storm. City
staff provided an estimate of the repair costs, which FEMA approved, in the amount of $162,477.
Of the project costs, FEMA will reimburse the City 75%, Cal OES 18.75%, and the City will be responsible for
the remaining 6.25%. Once the project is complete, copy of the invoices will be submitted to Cal OES, and
reimbursement funds will be released.
Discussion: City staff designed and completed Plans and Specifications for the Golf Course Storm Drain
Project internally and advertised the project for bid on April 27, 2020, with a bid opening on May 14. A copy of
Plans and Specifications is included as Attachment 1. The City received bids from fourteen contractors. The
bid tabulation is included as Attachment 2.
Schaefer Engineering Inc. was the apparent low bidder, with a bid amount of $108,338. A copy of Schaefer
Engineering's bid is provided as Attachment 3. After review of Schaefer's bid, it was found that the bid is non-
responsive, primarily due to the multiple errors or omissions in listing the subcontractor: no location of
subcontractor's place of business, no CSLB license number, incorrect public works registration number, and
failure to specify the work the subcontractor would perform. Per the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair
Practices Act (see Attachment 4), errors in registration or license numbers can be corrected within 24 hours of
the bid opening, but are limited to that.
The second lowest bid was received from T & T Paving Inc., dba Valley Paving in the amount of $114,671.
Page 77 of 550
Page 2 of 2
Please refer to Attachment 5 for a copy of their bid. After review, there was one error identified, which was the
listed subcontractor's Public Works Registration number written incorrectly. As identified earlier, this is an
error that can be corrected within 24 hours of the bid opening. Please refer to Attachment 6 for an email from
the contractor requesting the correction.
It is therefore staff's recommendation to award the bid for Specification No. 19-07 Golf Course Storm Drain
Project to T & T Paving Inc., dba Valley Paving in the amount of $114,671.
A budget amendment is also being requested in the amount of the bid plus 10%, to allow for contingencies for
the construction side, and a corresponding budget amendment on the revenue side to show the expected
reimbursement.
Recommended Action: Declare the bid from Schaefer Engineer Inc. as non-responsive, reject the bid, and
award the contract to T&T Paving Inc., dba Valley Paving in the Amount of $114,671 for the Golf Course
Storm Drain Project, Specification No. 19-07, and approval of corresponding budget amendment.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes.
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 72022400.80230.18191: $0
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 72022400.43290.18191: -$94,604; 72022400.43191.18191: -$23,651;
72000000.91100: -$7,883; 10000000.95720: $7,883; 72022400.80230.18191: $126,138
FINANCING SOURCE: 75% FEMA Public Assistance Grant, 18.75% Cal OES, 6.25% General Fund
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Andrew Stricklin, Public Works
Management Analyst; Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney
Page 78 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 7.h.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 8/5/2020
ITEM NO: 2020-489
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of Notice of Completion for Golf Course Storm Drain Project, Specification 19-07,
Change Orders and Budget Amendment in the Amount of $35,955.26.
DEPARTMENT:Public Works PREPARED BY:Jason Benson, Senior Civil Engineer
PRESENTER:
ATTACHMENTS:
1.Contract Change Order #1-4
2.Notice of Completion-Spec 19-07
3.Invoices- Valley Paving, Tayman Park Golf Group
4.Contract_1920255
Summary: Council will Consider 1. Accepting the work as complete. 2. Directing the City Clerk to file the
Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for Golf Course Storm Drain Replacement, Specification
No.19-07. 3. Approval of Change Orders. 4. Approval of Budget Amendment in the Amount of $35,955.26
Background: The City Council awarded a contract on May 20, 2020, to T&T Paving Inc., dba Valley Paving of
Redwood Valley, CA in the amount of $114,671, inclusive of quantities to be billed at actual amounts. The
project involved the removal and replacement of the existing storm drains damaged as a result of the February
storms in 2019. The project is FEMA-approved in the amount of $162,477. The total project costs will be
reimbursed by FEMA at 75%, by Cal OES 18.75%, and the City will be responsible for the remaining 6.25%.
With completion of the project, invoices will be submitted for reimbursable funds to be released.
Discussion: The work of the contract was completed by the contractor in substantial conformance with the
approved plans and specification on July 10, 2020. The City Engineer approved four contract change orders
(Attachment 1) totaling $31,270.50 for installation of storm drain pipe, drain inlets, replacement of existing
sidewalk, and the inlet and outflow of the storm drain system.
Approved change orders consisted of the following:
Change Order 1 - A 4” water main for the golf course irrigation system near an existing storm drain being
replaced is in the location of the new storm drain pipeline.
Change Order 2 – Conflict with a 4” water main for the golf course irrigation system near the storm drain and
drain inlet replacement. Additional excavation and backfill required to revise the existing terrain slope, with
additional adjustments to drain inlets.
Change Order 3 - Pave (4) areas of the golf course cart path outside of the construction zone damaged by
construction equipment and materials traffic. These areas shall include approximately 2,000 SF.
Page 79 of 550
Page 2 of 2
Change Order 4 – Bid item deduct for item #2 installation of 44 LF of storm drain and item #15 turf
replacement, and bid item add for item #3 installation of 44 LF of storm drain.
Based on actual quantities constructed and the authorized contract change orders, the final Valley Paving
contract cost was $162,093.36. Final payment of the retention will be made to the contractor after 35 days
from the date the Notice of Completion (Attachment 2) is filed with the County Recorder.
In addition to Change Order 4 for Valley Paving that had a deduction of $15,000 for turf replacement, the Golf
Course Management Team (Tayman Park Golf Group) agreed upon the replacement of turf at or below the
same cost. This work included materials: compost, grass seed, and fertilizer and labor time associated. The
invoice for this work (Attachment 3) also includes the Time and Material associated with irrigation timer repairs
that were damaged during excavation.
The total cost of the project is $162,093.36 and is below the FEMA approved amount of $162,477.00.
Staff is requesting approval of: Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for Golf Course Storm Drain
Replacement, Specification No.19-07. 2. Approval of Change Orders. 3. Approval of Budget Amendment in
the Amount of $35,955.26
The original contract has been attached for reference as Attachment 4.
Recommended Action: 1. Accept the work as complete. 2. Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of
Completion with the County Recorder for Golf Course Storm Drain Replacement, Specification No.19-07. 3.
Approval of Change Orders. 4. Approval of Budget Amendment in the Amount of $35,955.26
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes- $35,955.26
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 72022400.80230.18191: $126,138.10 (including 10% contingency)
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 72024400.43290.18191- $26,966.45; 72022400.43191.18191- $6,741.61;
10000000.95720- $2,247.20
FINANCING SOURCE: 75% FEMA Public Assistance Grant, 18.75% Cal OES, 6.25% General Fund
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: 1920255
COORDINATED WITH: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Mary Horger, Financial
Services Manager
Page 80 of 550
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item No: 7.c.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2021-922
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Report of Disposition of Surplus Materials, Used Equipment, and Supplies.
DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Seth Strader, Administrative Analyst
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Sold Assets
Summary: Council will receive a report of the disposition of surplus materials, used equipment, and supplies.
Background: In May 2021 an on-line auction was released for the sale of miscellaneous items from
City departments that have been determined obsolete, or in poor condition, and no longer used. As per policy,
all departments were notified of the availability of these items in surplus prior to the auction, in the case of an
unknown use for another department.
Discussion: The total amount of the sale was $48,866.00. Attachment 1 provides the list of items sold, the
amount they sold for, and the departments the sale proceeds have been applied to.
At the time of the auction, in addition to the wide-span marketing that GovDeals.com conducts, alerts of the
auction were placed on the City's website, and ads were run in The Ukiah Daily Journal.
Due to Covid-19 safety precautions auction items were not able to be inspected in person.
GovDeals.com is used by public agencies throughout the country to sell surplus items. The auction is
accessible both locally and abroad through their online portal.
Recommended Action: Receive and file report regarding the disposition of surplus materials, used
equipment, and supplies.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager; Mary Williamson, Buyer II; David Kirch,
Fleet and Maintenance Supervisor
Page 81 of 550
ATTACHMENT 1 ASSETS SOLD
May 2021
Item # Inv ID ID Description Sold Amount
Tax
Collected Department
1 2636 175 2007 Chevrolet Van/Camera Truck $14,500.00 $0.00 Sewer
2 2711 176 1989 Chevrolet R3500 Regular Cab 2WD $4,560.00 $0.00 Streets
3 2801 177 2001 American LaFrance Type 1 Fire Truck $3,892.00 $0.00 City Fire
4 3160 178 1994 GMC 1500 Pickup $2,275.00 $0.00 Police
5 4116 179 2011 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor $1,225.00 $0.00 Police
6 4146 180 2007 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor $1,625.00 $0.00 Police
7 4195 181 2007 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor $1,576.00 $0.00 Police
8 6431 182 1993 Ford F‐350 XL Reg. Cab DRW 2WD $6,503.00 $0.00 UVFD
9 6483 183 1994 Freightliner FL80 $8,750.00 $0.00 UVFD
10 6806 184 2006 Ford Expedition $3,025.00 $0.00 UVFD
11 185 185 100 GallonTank $100.00 $9.76 Garage
12 187 187 Lot of Tires $45.00 $4.39 Garage
13 189 189 Truck Scale $500.00 $48.81 WWTP
14 190 190 Ford F250 Bumper $20.00 $1.95 UVFA
15 191 191 Ford F250 Bumper $20.00 $1.95 City Fire
16 192 192 Two (2) Arden Industries Tablet Chlorination System $250.00 $24.41 WTP
TOTAL:$48,866.00 $91.27
$15,173.00
$145.00
$250.00
$15,000.00
$18,298.00Ukiah Valley Fire District
TOTAL DISTRIBUTION OF SALE PROCEEDS
Water
General
Garage
Sewer
Page 82 of 550
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item No: 7.d.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2020-425
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Notification of Publishing Services Agreement by Ukiah Daily Journal for Fiscal Year 2021/2022, in
the Amount of $6.25 per Column Inch for the First Insertion and $4.26 per Column Inch for Each Subsequent
Insertion of the Same Advertisement.
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk PREPARED BY: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Legal contract-City of Ukiah eff 2021-2022
Summary: Council is given the notification of the 2021/2022 legal publishing service rates from the Ukiah
Daily Journal.
Background: As the Ukiah Daily Journal is the only newspaper that qualifies for the designation as
“a newspaper having general circulation” in Ukiah, a formal process requesting bids for legal publishing
services was not used.
Discussion: The Ukiah Daily Journal submitted a letter outlining its proposed 2021/2022 fiscal year
contract rates for legal advertising with the City of Ukiah (Attachment #1). There is no increase from the
2020/2021 rates. The proposal is $6.25 for the first run, and $4.26 per column inch for additional insertions,
remaining the same as the last nine years.
Upon approval by the City Council, Staff will issue a Purchase Order to the Ukiah Daily Journal for legal
advertising costs.
Recommended Action: Receive and approve notification/agreement of the legal publishing services of
Ukiah Daily Journal for fiscal year 2021/2022, in the amount of $6.25 per column inch for the first issue and
$4.26 per column inch for additional issues.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: $5,000
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: City Clerk Legal Services
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: UDJ
Page 83 of 550
June 9, 2021
Kristine Lawler
City of Ukiah
463-6213
Ukiah, California 95482
Dear Kristine Lawler,
This letter serves as our proposed rate structure between the Ukiah Daily Journal and the City of Ukiah for legal
advertising for the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022.
The Legal Advertising rates for the City of Ukiah will remain the same, as the past several years, at $6.25 per
column inch for the first insertion and $4.26 per column inch for each subsequent insertion of the same
advertisement.
In addition to the following guidelines, all contract terms, conditions and general information specified on The
Ukiah Daily Journal’s current rate card (available online) apply to this agreement between The Ukiah Daily
Journal and the City of Ukiah:
Errors and omissions: The Ukiah Daily Journal is liable only for the cost of the space containing an error and is
not responsible for costs associated with omissions. Legal ads received and published after established deadlines
will not be eligible for credit or a re-run in case of error.
During future PG&E power shutdown events; or shelter-in-place orders that impact either Lake County or
Mendocino county, legal ad deadlines will be a week in advance.
Copy Acceptance: copy for legal ads will be accepted from printed copy, via email (as a text attachment only),
on a CD (in text format only), and via fax.
Proofs will be made available for copy received before deadline upon request. Second requests for tear sheets
after 30 days from publication are to be provided by electronic means (adobe PDF format). These will incur an
additional charge of $5 per request.
Requests for ads to run after published deadline will be considered as space and time allows, with no guarantee
of publication. Cancellations: Ads canceled after published deadlines will incur a 25% cancellation penalty, if
indeed we have not printed said ad, in those cases the charges will stand.
Advertiser must notify The Ukiah Daily Journal within 30 days of receipt of bill of any discrepancies. The bill
will be due in full 15 days upon receipt. Finance charges will not be waived for amounts due over 60 days. Any
previous contracted terms expire 30 days after the date of this notice.
Thank you,
Kevin McConnell
Publisher
The Ukiah Daily Journal
Mendocino County’s
Local newspaper
The Ukiah Daily Journal
617 S. State St.
Ukiah, CA. 95482
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 84 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 7.e.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2021-923
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approve a Four (4) Year Cooperative Agreement with the California Department of Forestry and
Fire Protection for Fire and Emergency Medical Dispatching Services, for an Amount not to Exceed
$356,303.00 per Year.
DEPARTMENT: Fire PREPARED BY: Doug Hutchison, Fire Chief
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. CAL Fire Dispatch 7-21 to 6-25
Summary: The City Council will consider approving a four (4) year Cooperative Agreement with the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL Fire) for fire and emergency medical dispatching, in an
amount not to exceed $356,303.00 per year, and authorize the City Manager to sign.
Background: Since 2012, CAL Fire has provided fire and emergency medical dispatching to the City of Ukiah
under a Cooperative Agreement.
Discussion: Our current Cooperative Agreement with CAL Fire expires on June 30, 2021. This was a one (1)
year extension of the previous two (2) year agreement.
We had hoped during the one (1) year extension that we would be able to engage with our counterparts at the
County of Mendocino to propose a single Cooperative Agreement that would cover both the County and the
City. Unfortunately due to COVID-19 and the necessity of focusing on response efforts to the pandemic, we
were unable to do so.
CAL Fire would like to propose a four (4) year agreement, Attachment 1, to allow them better workforce
planning and management. They have proposed the same term for the County of Mendocino's agreement
which also expires on June 30th. This timeframe will better allow for us to engage with both the County and
CAL Fire on consolidating the agreements into one.
The proposed maximum amount per year represents 4.3% increase in costs over our current agreement. It
should be noted that while we budget for the maximum cost, we are only billed actual costs, and our long
history with them has shown our actual costs to be less than the maximum.
The budget proposed for FYE 22 is $230,748 which is consistent with past annual costs. These services will
continue to be re-budgeted for each fiscal year.
Recommended Action: Approve a four (4) year cooperative agreement with the California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL Fire) for fire and emergency medical dispatching services, in an amount not
to exceed $356,303.00 per year, and authorize the City Manager to sign.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: Proposed for FYE 22: 10521210.52100: $230,748
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
Page 85 of 550
Page 2 of 2
FINANCING SOURCE: General Fund
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Doug Hutchison- Fire Chief
Page 86 of 550
Page 87 of 550
Page 88 of 550
Page 89 of 550
Page 90 of 550
Page 91 of 550
Page 92 of 550
Page 93 of 550
Page 94 of 550
Page 95 of 550
Page 96 of 550
Page 97 of 550
Page 98 of 550
Page 99 of 550
Page 100 of 550
Page 101 of 550
Page 102 of 550
Page 103 of 550
Page 104 of 550
Page 105 of 550
Page 106 of 550
Page 107 of 550
Page 108 of 550
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item No: 7.f.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2021-924
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of Inter-Fund Loan and Corresponding Budget Amendment for the Street and Tree
Lighting Portion of the Streetscape Project.
DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Change Order
Summary: Council will consider approving an inter-fund loan and corresponding budget amendment for the
street and tree lighting portion of the Streetscape Project.
Background: Public Works executed Change Order #4 (Attachment 1) in the amount of $392,130.98 for the
Streetscape Project with Ghilotti Construction, to revise the contract to include the installation of a street and
tree lighting system. The tree lighting was part of the conceptual plans and part of the landscape architects
vision. However, the final construction plans had to be amended several times to fit into the approvable format
for the grants that are managed by Cal Trans. In the plan iterations, the tree lighting was inadvertently
removed. The Council action is intended to restore the project to the original design.
Discussion: Electric Utility, Public Works, and the City Manager's Office have coordinated the lighting portion
of the project and its funding, and have identified Fund 805, Street Lighting, as the most appropriate fund.
Current and future revenues, as needed, will be applied to pay for the lighting system. In the meantime, an
inter-fund loan is recommended from Fund 800 to assist in the immediate funding of this portion of the project.
Recommended Action: Approve setting up an inter-fund loan and corresponding budget amendment for the
Street and Tree Lighting portion of the Streetscape project.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: Yes
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 80526610.80230.18019: $0
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 80526610.80230.18019: $392,130.98
FINANCING SOURCE: Fund 800 and 805
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: 1920-216
COORDINATED WITH: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director; Mel Grandi, Electric Utility Director; Tim Eriksen, Public
Works Director
Page 109 of 550
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 110 of 550
Page 111 of 550
Page 112 of 550
Page 113 of 550
Page 114 of 550
Page 115 of 550
Page 116 of 550
Page 117 of 550
Page 118 of 550
Page 119 of 550
Page 120 of 550
Page 121 of 550
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item No: 7.g.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2021-925
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Authorize City Manager to Enter Agreement with Redwood Valley Calpella Fire District for the Sale
and Placement of a 60' Pole from the Electric Utility.
DEPARTMENT: Electric Utility PREPARED BY: Cindy Sauers, Electric Utility Director
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. UTILITY POLE SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT
Summary: Council will consider authorizing the City Manager to approve the agreement for the mutual aid
sale and placement of a 60' pole from the Electric Utility to the Redwood Valley Calpella Fire District.
Background: Redwood Valley Capella Fire District has requested assistance with providing and installing a
60' class 1 wood utility pole. The pole will be used to mount a new emergency alert siren, replacing an older,
smaller alert system. The Redwood Valley Calpella Fire District was encountering problems obtaining and
installing the necessary pole prior to fire season. With the City's assistance, the Fire District will be able to
move ahead in making the alert system operational this season.
Discussion: The Electric Utility uses various sizes of poles throughout the electric system The City has
additional poles available for system improvements. The Electric Utility team is proud to assist the Redwood
Valley community where many City employees and friends reside. Furthermore, an early warning system
improves fire resiliency for the entire Ukiah Valley including City of Ukiah infrastructure.
Staff worked with the City Attorney to draft a sales agreement (Attachment 1), if approved, it will be executed
with Redwood Valley Calpella Fire District to sell and set the pole to Fire Authority standards for a fee of
$1,400.00. This amount covers the cost of the pole.
Recommended Action: Authorize City Manager to enter into an agreement with Redwood Valley Calpella
Fire District for the sale and placement of a 60' pole from the Electric Utility.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE:
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.:
COORDINATED WITH: Sage, Sangiacomo, City Manager; Mel Grandi, Electric Utility Director
Page 122 of 550
1
UTILITY POLE SALE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT
This agreement is made and entered on ________, 2021 (“Effective Date”) in Ukiah, California
between the City of Ukiah (“City”), a general law municipal corporation, and the Redwood Valley
Calpella Fire District (“District”), a California fire district formed under and in compliance with the Fire
Protection District Law of 1987 (Health and Safety Code Sections 13800 et seq.). District and City may be
referred to herein as “parties,” or individually as a “party.”
RECITALS:
1. District requires a wooden utility pole upon which to mount a public notification system at its
fire station (the “Station”) located at 8481 East Road, Redwood Valley, California, 95470.
2. City’s electric utility has a utility pole of the type used to mount electrical transformers and
electrical distribution wires used in the City’s electrical distribution system. The pole is a sixty-foot long
Class 1 treated wood pole (“the Pole”).
3. District has been informed that the Pole has been stored outside for a number of years and
would be installed using guy wires, if used in the City’s electrical distribution system.
4. District has inspected the Pole and determined that it is suitable for the use intended by
District.
5. Except as noted in Recital No. 3, above, the City has made no representations concerning the
condition of the pole or its suitability for the District’s intended use. The District has not relied on the
City in deciding to use and install the Pole.
6. The City has agreed to sell the Pole to the District for its book value which is $1,400.00 as
shown on the City’s inventory.
AGREEMENT:
Based on the foregoing recitals which are incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement
and the terms and conditions as stated below, the parties hereby agree as follows.
1. Sale of Pole. City hereby sells the Pole to District and District purchases the Pole from City.
2. Price. Prior to the installation of the Pole, District shall pay City $1,400.00 as the full and
complete price for the Pole and its delivery to and installation at the Station by the City.
3. Delivery and Installation. City shall deliver the Pole to the Station and dig a hole for installing
it as directed by District. District shall determine the depth of the hole. The City shall place the Pole in
the hole and replace and compact dirt in the hole to secure the Pole. At District’s direction, the City will
not use guy wires to secure the Pole. District accepts the Pole in its AS-IS, WHERE IS condition. The City
makes no representation or warranty concerning the condition or suitability of the Pole for the District’s
intended use or its installation and the District waives and releases the City, and its officers, agents and
employees, from any liability arising from the District’s acceptance and use of the Pole.
4. Waiver of Warranties. DISTRICT HEREBY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY SORT,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, EXCEPT THAT OF TITLE, AND DISTRICT HEREBY SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, COURSE OF DEALING, USAGE OF TRADE AND FITNESS
Attachment 1
Page 123 of 550
2
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PURPORTED TERMS AND CONDITIONS
CONTAINED IN ANY DOCUMENT PREPARED BY DISTRICT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS SALE. CITY SHALL
NOT BE LIABLE FOR CONSEQUENTIAL, SPECIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND WHATSOEVER,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOSS OF REVENUE OR PROFITS.
5. Indemnification and Insurance. District agrees to indemnify the City for and defend the City
against any claim for damages or other payment of money by District or any third party arising from the
installation by City and use of the Pole by the District, including all costs of defending the City against the
claim, such as, but not limited to, the fees of attorneys, experts, consultants, investigators or expert
witnesses and all other litigation costs and expenses and paying any settlement or judgment. This
indemnification of City includes its officers, agents, and employees. Under any public liability insurance
policy covering claims against the District, the District shall have City named as an additional insured
with the same right to and scope of coverage under the policy as it provides to District.
6. Integration. This agreement contains the entire agreement between the City and the District
concerning the sale and installation of the Pole and supersedes and replaces any prior agreement,
statement, or representation by either party. This agreement may be amended only by a signed written
agreement approved in the manner required by law by the City and the District.
7. Notice. Any notice or other communication permitted or required by this Agreement shall be
in writing and deemed given and received, when received, if delivered by overnight currier or email or
48 hours after deposit in the United States mail with proper first-class postage affixed thereto, when
addressed as follows:
DISTRICT CITY
Redwood Valley Calpella Fire District Attention: City Manager
P.O. Box 385 Ukiah Civic Center
8481 East Road 300 Seminary Ave.
Redwood Valley, CA, 95470 Ukiah, CA 95482
Email: clerk-rvcfd@comcast.net Email: ssangiacomo@cityofukiah.com
WHEREFORE, this Agreement is made and entered on the Effective Date.
Redwood Valley Calpella Fire District City of Ukiah
By: _____________________ By: _________________________
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Its: _____________________
ATTEST: ___________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Page 124 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 7.h.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2021-930
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Authorize the City Manager to Execute All Agreements Necessary to Accept the Distribution of the
U.S. Department of the Treasury American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery
Funds.
DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager
PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. ARP Required Forms
2. SLFRPFAQ as of 6-10-21
Summary: Council will consider authorizing the City Manager to execute all agreements necessary to accept
the distribution of the U.S. Department of the Treasury American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 Coronavirus Local
Fiscal Recovery funds.
Background: The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) appropriates $19.53 billion to States for
distribution to tens of thousands of "non-entitlement units of local government" (NEUs). An NEU is defined as
local governments with populations of less than 50,000, of which the City of Ukiah is one. The funding was
established to help states and localities address the economic and health consequences of the pandemic.
Funding is subject to the requirements specified in the Interim Final Rule published by the U.S. Treasury in the
Code of Federal Regulations on May 17, 2021.
Discussion: A State is required to allocate and distribute the Local Fiscal Recovery Fund payment received
from Treasury to each NEU in the State an amount that bears the same proportion to the amount of such
payment as the population of the NEU bears to the total population of all the NEUs in the State. Based on this
formula, it is anticipated that the City will receive up to $3,826,344. Treasury will make payments to States
from the Local Fiscal Recovery fund for distribution to NEUs in two tranches, with the Second Tranche
payment to be made no earlier than 12 months after the date on which the First Tranche payment is paid to
the State.
In order for the State to distribute the funds, they are required to establish a process for NEUs to submit
requests for the payments. On June 9, 2021, the State of California activated an online portal for NEUs to
submit the necessary paperwork to request the funds, with a deadline to submit of June 23, 2021. Staff is
requesting Council to authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary documents in order to accept the
funds. Please see Attachment 1 for a copy of the required forms.
Specific eligible uses for the funding per the Treasury's Interim Final Rule are still being evaluated. Please
see Attachment 2 for the most recent version of frequently asked questions regarding the Coronavirus State
and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. The Treasury is seeking comment on all aspects of the Interim Final Rule,
and further guidance for eligible uses are anticipated to be released in August.
It important to note, the City of Ukiah has incurred considerable costs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic
Page 125 of 550
Page 2 of 2
and these funds are vitally important to offsetting expenses already incurred.
Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to execute all agreements necessary to accept the
distribution of the U.S. Department of the Treasury American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 Coronavirus Local
Fiscal Recovery funds.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Dan Buffalo, Director of Finance
Page 126 of 550
__________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
OMB Approved No. 1505-0271
Expiration Date: November 30, 2021
U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS
Recipient name and address:DUNS Number:
Taxpayer Identification Number:
Assistance Listing Number: 21.027
Sections 602(b) and 603(b) of the Social Security Act (the Act) as added by section 9901 of the
American Rescue Plan Act, Pub. L. No. 117-2 (March 11, 2021) authorize the Department of the
Treasury (Treasury) to make payments to certain recipients from the Coronavirus State Fiscal
Recovery Fund and the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund.
Recipient hereby agrees, as a condition to receiving such payment from Treasury, to the terms
attached hereto.
Recipient:
Authorized Representative:
Title:
Date signed:
U.S.Department of the Treasury:
Authorized Representative:
Title:
Date:
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTICE
The information collected will be used for the U.S. Government to process requests for support. The
estimated burden associated with this collection of information is 15 minutes per response. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and suggestions for reducing this burden should be
directed to the Office of Privacy, Transparency and Records, Department of the Treasury, 1500
Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20220. DO NOT send the form to this address. An agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless
it displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 127 of 550
1.
2 .
3.
4.
5 .
6.
7.
8.
U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
CORONAVIRUS LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUND
AWARD TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Use of Funds.
a. Recipient understands and agrees that the funds disbursed under this award may only be
used in compliance with section 603(c) of the Social Security Act (the Act), Treasury’s
regulations implementing that section, and guidance issued by Treasury regarding the
foregoing.
b. Recipient will determine prior to engaging in any project using this assistance that it has
the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure proper planning,
management, and completion of such project.
Period of Performance. The period of performance for this award begins on the date hereof and
ends on December 31, 2026. As set forth in Treasury’s implementing regulations, Recipient
may use award funds to cover eligible costs incurred during the period that begins on March
3, 2021, and ends on December 31, 2024.
Reporting. Recipient agrees to comply with any reporting obligations established by Treasury
as they relate to this award.
Maintenance of and Access to Records
a. Recipient shall maintain records and financial documents sufficient to evidence compliance
with section 603(c) of the Act, Treasury’s regulations implementing that section, and
guidance issued by Treasury regarding the foregoing.
b. The Treasury Office of Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office, or
their authorized representatives, shall have the right of access to records (electronic and
otherwise) of Recipient in order to conduct audits or other investigations.
c. Records shall be maintained by Recipient for a period of five (5) years after all funds have
been expended or returned to Treasury, whichever is later.
Pre-award Costs. Pre-award costs, as defined in 2 C.F.R. § 200.458, may not be paid with
funding from this award.
Administrative Costs. Recipient may use funds provided under this award to cover both direct
and indirect costs.
Cost Sharing. Cost sharing or matching funds are not required to be provided by Recipient.
Conflicts of Interest. Recipient understands and agrees it must maintain a conflict of
interest policy consistent with 2 C.F.R. § 200.318(c) and that such conflict of interest policy
is applicable to each activity funded under this award. Recipient and subrecipients must
disclose in writing to Treasury or the pass-through entity, as appropriate, any potential
conflict of interest affecting the awarded funds in accordance with 2 C.F.R. § 200.112.
2
Page 128 of 550
9. Compliance with Applicable Law and Regulations.
a. Recipient agrees to comply with the requirements of section 603 of the Act, regulations
adopted by Treasury pursuant to section 603(f) of the Act, and guidance issued by Treasury
regarding the foregoing. Recipient also agrees to comply with all other applicable federal
statutes, regulations, and executive orders, and Recipient shall provide for such compliance
by other parties in any agreements it enters into with other parties relating to this award.
b. Federal regulations applicable to this award include, without limitation, the following:
i. Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for
Federal Awards, 2 C.F.R. Part 200, other than such provisions as Treasury may
determine are inapplicable to this Award and subject to such exceptions as may be
otherwise provided by Treasury. Subpart F – Audit Requirements of the Uniform
Guidance, implementing the Single Audit Act, shall apply to this award.
ii. Universal Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM), 2 C.F.R. Part 25,
pursuant to which the award term set forth in Appendix A to 2 C.F.R. Part 25 is
hereby incorporated by reference.
iii. Reporting Subaward and Executive Compensation Information, 2 C.F.R. Part 170,
pursuant to which the award term set forth in Appendix A to 2 C.F.R. Part 170 is
hereby incorporated by reference.
iv. OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension
(Nonprocurement), 2 C.F.R. Part 180, including the requirement to include a term or
condition in all lower tier covered transactions (contracts and subcontracts described
in 2 C.F.R. Part 180, subpart B) that the award is subject to 2 C.F.R. Part 180 and
Treasury’s implementing regulation at 31 C.F.R. Part 19.
v. Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters, pursuant to which the award term set
forth in 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix XII to Part 200 is hereby incorporated by
reference.
vi. Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace, 31 C.F.R. Part 20.
vii. New Restrictions on Lobbying, 31 C.F.R. Part 21.
viii. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C.
§§ 4601-4655) and implementing regulations.
ix. Generally applicable federal environmental laws and regulations.
c. Statutes and regulations prohibiting discrimination applicable to this award include,
without limitation, the following:
i. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d et seq.) and Treasury’s
implementing regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 22, which prohibit discrimination on the
basis of race, color, or national origin under programs or activities receiving federal
financial assistance;
3
Page 129 of 550
10 . _____ _
11. ___ _
12. _____ _
13. ___ _
14. ------------
ii. The Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. §§ 3601
et seq.), which prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color,
religion, national origin, sex, familial status, or disability;
iii. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. § 794), which
prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability under any program or activity
receiving federal financial assistance;
iv. The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§ 6101 et seq.), and
Treasury’s implementing regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 23, which prohibit
discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving federal
financial assistance; and
v. Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (42 U.S.C. §§
12101 et seq.), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability under
programs, activities, and services provided or made available by state and local
governments or instrumentalities or agencies thereto.
Remedial Actions. In the event of Recipient’s noncompliance with section 603 of the Act, other
applicable laws, Treasury’s implementing regulations, guidance, or any reporting or other
program requirements, Treasury may impose additional conditions on the receipt of a
subsequent tranche of future award funds, if any, or take other available remedies as set
forth in 2 C.F.R. § 200.339. In the case of a violation of section 603(c) of the Act regarding the
use of funds, previous payments shall be subject to recoupment as provided in section 603(e)
of the Act.
Hatch Act. Recipient agrees to comply, as applicable, with requirements of the Hatch Act (5
U.S.C. §§ 1501-1508 and 7324-7328), which limit certain political activities of State or local
government employees whose principal employment is in connection with an activity
financed in whole or in part by this federal assistance.
False Statements. Recipient understands that making false statements or claims in connection
with this award is a violation of federal law and may result in criminal, civil, or administrative
sanctions, including fines, imprisonment, civil damages and penalties, debarment from
participating in federal awards or contracts, and/or any other remedy available by law.
Publications. Any publications produced with funds from this award must display the
following language: “This project [is being] [was] supported, in whole or in part, by federal
award number [enter project FAIN] awarded to [name of Recipient] by the U.S. Department
of the Treasury.”
Debts Owed the Federal Government.
a. Any funds paid to Recipient (1) in excess of the amount to which Recipient is finally
determined to be authorized to retain under the terms of this award; (2) that are
determined by the Treasury Office of Inspector General to have been misused; or (3)
that are determined by Treasury to be subject to a repayment obligation pursuant to
section 603(e) of the Act and have not been repaid by Recipient shall constitute a debt
to the federal government.
b. Any debts determined to be owed the federal government must be paid promptly by
4
Page 130 of 550
15. ___ _
16. ----------
17. ---------------
18. -------------
Recipient. A debt is delinquent if it has not been paid by the date specified in Treasury’s
initial written demand for payment, unless other satisfactory arrangements have been
made or if the Recipient knowingly or improperly retains funds that are a debt as
defined in paragraph 14(a). Treasury will take any actions available to it to collect such
a debt.
Disclaimer.
a. The United States expressly disclaims any and all responsibility or liability to Recipient
or third persons for the actions of Recipient or third persons resulting in death, bodily
injury, property damages, or any other losses resulting in any way from the
performance of this award or any other losses resulting in any way from the
performance of this award or any contract, or subcontract under this award.
b. The acceptance of this award by Recipient does not in any way establish an agency
relationship between the United States and Recipient.
Protections for Whistleblowers.
a. In accordance with 41 U.S.C. § 4712, Recipient may not discharge, demote, or otherwise
discriminate against an employee in reprisal for disclosing to any of the list of persons or
entities provided below, information that the employee reasonably believes is evidence of
gross mismanagement of a federal contract or grant, a gross waste of federal funds, an
abuse of authority relating to a federal contract or grant, a substantial and specific danger
to public health or safety, or a violation of law, rule, or regulation related to a federal
contract (including the competition for or negotiation of a contract) or grant.
b. The list of persons and entities referenced in the paragraph above includes the following:
i. A member of Congress or a representative of a committee of Congress;
ii. An Inspector General;
iii. The Government Accountability Office;
iv. A Treasury employee responsible for contract or grant oversight or management;
v. An authorized official of the Department of Justice or other law enforcement
agency;
vi. A court or grand jury; or
vii. A management official or other employee of Recipient, contractor, or
subcontractor who has the responsibility to investigate, discover, or address
misconduct.
c. Recipient shall inform its employees in writing of the rights and remedies provided under
this section, in the predominant native language of the workforce.
Increasing Seat Belt Use in the United States. Pursuant to Executive Order 13043, 62 FR
19217 (Apr. 18, 1997), Recipient should encourage its contractors to adopt and enforce on-the-
job seat belt policies and programs for their employees when operating company-owned,
rented or personally owned vehicles.
Reducing Text Messaging While Driving. Pursuant to Executive Order 13513, 74 FR 51225
(Oct. 6, 2009), Recipient should encourage its employees, subrecipients, and contractors to
adopt and enforce policies that ban text messaging while driving, and Recipient should
establish workplace safety policies to decrease accidents caused by distracted drivers.
5
Page 131 of 550
CERTIFICATION OF CORONAVIRUS LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUND
ALLOCATION ACCEPATANCE (42 U.S.C. section 603)
I, , am the chief executive or authorized designee of
, and I certify that:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Check one:
In my role as an authorized representative, I am accepting the
allocation from the Coronavirus
Local Fiscal Recovery Fund.
In my role as an authorized representative, I am declining the
[Insert city or town name here] allocation from the Coronavirus Local
Fiscal Recovery Fund, and authorize this allocation to be transferred to the
State of California. An additional U.S. Treasury form will likely be required
and subsequent information may be requested.
If you are accepting funds, proceed to questions 2 through 5. If you are
declining funds, skip to question 6 and sign and submit the form.
I have the authority on behalf of to
report the following information:
Entity’s Taxpayer Identification Number
DUNS number
Address
Total budget or top-line expenditure total as of January 27, 2020
I certify that my city or town is in compliance with 2 CFR Part 180 and that I
have the authority on behalf of to
submit the following U.S. Treasury documents:
Award Terms and Conditions agreement
Assurances of Compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Authorized Representative
Signature: ____________________________________ Date: ______________________
Name (Print): ____________________________________ Title: ________________________
I certify that the total budget amount provided is supported by an approved
budget document, as of January 27, 2020. If my city or town does not have an
approved budget, I certify that the total annual expenditure amount
provided is supported by accounting documents. I agree to retain copies of
financial records and supporting documentation for five years after all funds
have been expended and the documents in item 3 of this certification and
submit them to U.S. Treasury as required, no later than October 31, 2021
I agree to submit a project and expenditures report annually to U.S. Treasury.
I understand the State will rely on this certification as a material representation in
distributing Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Relief Funds to
.
Page 132 of 550
OMB Approved No. 1505-0271
Expiration Date: November 30, 2021
ASSURANCES OF COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS REQUIREMENTS
ASSURANCES OF COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE VI OF THE
CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964
As a condition of receipt of federal financial assistance from the Department of the Treasury, the
recipient named below (hereinafter referred to as the “Recipient”) provides the assurances stated herein. The
federal financial assistance may include federal grants, loans and contracts to provide assistance to the
Recipient’s beneficiaries, the use or rent of Federal land or property at below market value, Federal training, a
loan of Federal personnel, subsidies, and other arrangements with the intention of providing assistance. Federal
financial assistance does not encompass contracts of guarantee or insurance, regulated programs, licenses,
procurement contracts by the Federal government at market value, or programs that provide direct benefits.
The assurances apply to all federal financial assistance from or funds made available through the
Department of the Treasury, including any assistance that the Recipient may request in the future.
The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 provides that the provisions of the assurances apply to all of
the operations of the Recipient’s program(s) and activity(ies), so long as any portion of the Recipient’s
program(s) or activity(ies) is federally assisted in the manner prescribed above.
1. Recipient ensures its current and future compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended, which prohibits exclusion from participation, denial of the benefits of, or subjection to
discrimination under programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance, of any person in the
United States on the ground of race, color, or national origin (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.), as implemented by
the Department of the Treasury Title VI regulations at 31 CFR Part 22 and other pertinent executive orders
such as Executive Order 13166, directives, circulars, policies, memoranda, and/or guidance documents.
2. Recipient acknowledges that Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with
Limited English Proficiency,” seeks to improve access to federally assisted programs and activities for
individuals who, because of national origin, have Limited English proficiency (LEP). Recipient
understands that denying a person access to its programs, services, and activities because of LEP is a form
of national origin discrimination prohibited under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the
Department of the Treasury’s implementing regulations. Accordingly, Recipient shall initiate reasonable
steps, or comply with the Department of the Treasury’s directives, to ensure that LEP persons have
meaningful access to its programs, services, and activities. Recipient understands and agrees that
meaningful access may entail providing language assistance services, including oral interpretation and
written translation where necessary, to ensure effective communication in the Recipient’s programs,
services, and activities.
3. Recipient agrees to consider the need for language services for LEP persons when Recipient develops
applicable budgets and conducts programs, services, and activities. As a resource, the Department of the
Treasury has published its LEP guidance at 70 FR 6067. For more information on taking reasonable steps
to provide meaningful access for LEP persons, please visit http://www.lep.gov.
1
Page 133 of 550
OMB Approved No. 1505-0271
Expiration Date: November 30, 2021
4. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that compliance with the assurances constitutes a condition of continued
receipt of federal financial assistance and is binding upon Recipient and Recipient’s successors, transferees,
and assignees for the period in which such assistance is provided.
5. Recipient acknowledges and agrees that it must require any sub-grantees, contractors, subcontractors,
successors, transferees, and assignees to comply with assurances 1-4 above, and agrees to incorporate the
following language in every contract or agreement subject to Title VI and its regulations between the
Recipient and the Recipient’s sub-grantees, contractors, subcontractors, successors, transferees, and
assignees:
The sub-grantee, contractor, subcontractor, successor, transferee, and assignee shall comply with Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits recipients of federal financial assistance from
excluding from a program or activity, denying benefits of, or otherwise discriminating against a person
on the basis of race, color, or national origin (42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.), as implemented by the
Department of the Treasury’s Title VI regulations, 31 CFR Part 22, which are herein incorporated by
reference and made a part of this contract (or agreement). Title VI also includes protection to persons
with “Limited English Proficiency” in any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance, 42
U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., as implemented by the Department of the Treasury’s Title VI regulations, 31
CFR Part 22, and herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract or agreement.
6. Recipient understands and agrees that if any real property or structure is provided or improved with the aid
of federal financial assistance by the Department of the Treasury, this assurance obligates the Recipient, or
in the case of a subsequent transfer, the transferee, for the period during which the real property or structure
is used for a purpose for which the federal financial assistance is extended or for another purpose involving
the provision of similar services or benefits. If any personal property is provided, this assurance obligates
the Recipient for the period during which it retains ownership or possession of the property.
7. Recipient shall cooperate in any enforcement or compliance review activities by the Department of the
Treasury of the aforementioned obligations. Enforcement may include investigation, arbitration, mediation,
litigation, and monitoring of any settlement agreements that may result from these actions. The Recipient
shall comply with information requests, on-site compliance reviews and reporting requirements.
8. Recipient shall maintain a complaint log and inform the Department of the Treasury of any complaints of
discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, and limited English proficiency covered by
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and implementing regulations and provide, upon request, a list of all
such reviews or proceedings based on the complaint, pending or completed, including outcome. Recipient
also must inform the Department of the Treasury if Recipient has received no complaints under Title VI.
9. Recipient must provide documentation of an administrative agency’s or court’s findings of non-compliance
of Title VI and efforts to address the non-compliance, including any voluntary compliance or other
2
Page 134 of 550
_________________________________
_________________________________
OMB Approved No. 1505-0271
Expiration Date: November 30, 2021
agreements between the Recipient and the administrative agency that made the finding. If the Recipient
settles a case or matter alleging such discrimination, the Recipient must provide documentation of the
settlement. If Recipient has not been the subject of any court or administrative agency finding of
discrimination, please so state.
10. If the Recipient makes sub-awards to other agencies or other entities, the Recipient is responsible for
ensuring that sub-recipients also comply with Title VI and other applicable authorities covered in this
document State agencies that make sub-awards must have in place standard grant assurances and review
procedures to demonstrate that that they are effectively monitoring the civil rights compliance of sub-
recipients.
The United States of America has the right to seek judicial enforcement of the terms of this assurances
document and nothing in this document alters or limits the federal enforcement measures that the United States
may take in order to address violations of this document or applicable federal law.
Under penalty of perjury, the undersigned official(s) certifies that official(s) has read and understood the
Recipient’s obligations as herein described, that any information submitted in conjunction with this assurances
document is accurate and complete, and that the Recipient is in compliance with the aforementioned
nondiscrimination requirements.
Recipient Date
Signature of Authorized Official
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTICE
The information collected will be used for the U.S. Government to process requests for support. The estimated burden associated with
this collection of information is 30 minutes per response. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and suggestions
for reducing this burden should be directed to the Office of Privacy, Transparency and Records, Department of the Treasury, 1500
Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20220. DO NOT send the form to this address. An agency may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.
3
Page 135 of 550
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 136 of 550
Page 137 of 550
Page 138 of 550
Page 139 of 550
Page 140 of 550
Page 141 of 550
Page 142 of 550
Page 143 of 550
Page 144 of 550
Page 145 of 550
Page 146 of 550
Page 147 of 550
Page 148 of 550
Page 149 of 550
Page 150 of 550
Page 151 of 550
Page 152 of 550
Page 153 of 550
Page 154 of 550
Page 155 of 550
Page 156 of 550
Page 157 of 550
Page 158 of 550
Page 159 of 550
Page 160 of 550
Page 1 of 3
Agenda Item No: 11.a.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2021-920
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Consideration and Possible Introduction of an Ordinance by Title Only to Add Section 9004 to
Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 1 to Require Compliance with the 2020 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP).
DEPARTMENT: Community
Development PREPARED BY: Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director
PRESENTER: Craig Schlatter, Community Development
Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. UKI ALUCP - ADOPTED May 20, 2021 - COMPLETE PRINT FILE
2. ALUC Revised ISND
3. UKI ALUCP Compatibility Map
4. Draft Ordinance- UKIALUCP
Summary: Council will consider introducing an ordinance requiring compliance with the 2020 Ukiah Municipal
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP).
Background: The basic function of airport land use compatibility plans is to promote compatibility between
airports and surrounding land uses. Airport Land Use Commissions ("ALUCs") are appointed with authority
under the State Aeronautics Act to adopt airport land use compatibility plans and carry out land use project
review responsibilities. The Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission was formed in 1993 and on
October 21, 1993, adopted the Mendocino County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan ("MCACLUP"). The
MCACLUP was revised on June 6, 1996, to include the Ukiah Municipal Airport ("UKI").
Since June 6, 1996, the MCACLUP has been the airport land use compatibility plan for UKI and the City of
Ukiah. Over the course of the last 25 years, however, airport environs have changed due to continued
development within the areas of the City, airport operations and the airport layout, and new and updated
regulations within the State Aeronautics Act as summarized in the 2011 California Division of Aeronautics
Airport Land Use Planning Handbook ("Handbook"). The Handbook provides guidance on the formation and
operation of ALUCs, the preparation of compatibility plans, procedures for review of local actions, and the
responsibilities of local agencies. To update standards to those of the 2011 Handbook, as well as protect the
viability of existing and future airport operations by aligning the compatibility zones and criteria with current
standards, in June 2018 the City Council directed Staff to work with Mendocino County Planning and Building
Services staff and the Mendocino County ALUC to develop a complete, stand-alone airport land use
compatibility plan for UKI.
The planning effort to develop the Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan ("UKIALUCP) was
initiated in February 2019 with support from the County of Mendocino and Mendocino County ALUC. A draft of
the UKIALUCP was completed on January 31, 2020, but public review was delayed until July 2020 due to the
COVID-19 pandemic. An Initial Study and Negative Declaration examining environmental impacts under
CEQA was prepared and circulated on July 21, 2020, together with the Public Review draft 2020 UKIALUCP.
Subsequently, revisions were made to the Public Review draft in response to the November 2020 ALUC
direction regarding accommodation of the CalFire Lockheed C-130 fire attack aircraft. The primary change
Page 161 of 550
Page 2 of 3
was to add a Compatibility Zone 1* beyond Zone 1 at each end of the runway to protect for the possible future
runway extension. The environmental impacts of the addition of the Zone 1*s were examined and found to be
the same or less than existed under the 1996 MCACLUP.
The Final UKIALUCP (Attachment 1) was adopted by the Mendocino County ALUC on May 20, 2021. The
associated CEQA Negative Declaration (Attachment 2) was also approved by the ALUC at this meeting. This
ALUC-adopted UKIALUCP replaces the earlier 1996 MCACLUP for Ukiah Municipal Airport.
Discussion: As of May 20, 2021, the UKIALUCP is the airport compatibility plan for Ukiah Municipal Airport
and the Other Airport Environs airport influence area (see Map in Attachment 3). To implement the UKIALUCP
within Ukiah city limits, "state law requires each local agency having jurisdiction over land uses within an
ALUC's planning area to modify its general and any affected specific plans to be consistent with the
compatibility plan." (UKIALUCP, page 17).
This can be accomplished in primarily four different ways. One of the ways indicated within the UKIALUCP is
to "adopt a General Plan Airport Element." Another way is to "adopt Compatibility Plan as Stand-Alone
Document," which is further described in Appendix F of the UKIALUCP. A third way is to "incorporate policies
into existing general plan elements," and a fourth way is to "adopt airport combining district or overlay zoning
ordinance."
As the City is presently in the process of updating its General Plan (2040 General Plan), Staff intends to
facilitate a revised Airport Element in conjunction with this undertaking. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption
of the UKIALUCP as a stand-alone document through introduction of an Ordinance (Attachment 4). This
interim measure will ensure immediate implementation of the UKIALUCP for areas under the City's jurisdiction.
It will also allow for a more appropriate and efficient utilization of Staff resources as the 2040 General Plan is
developed.
Additionally, this recommended process will allow for enhanced internal consistency of General Plan
components. For example, compatibility criteria and associated maps and procedural policies of the
UKIALUCP can be more effectively integrated into the Land Use Element if developed holistically. By
incorporating runway protection criteria, the ALUC ensured that the UKIALUCP will be fundamental to
updating the Airport Element, especially with regard to on-airport development and operational purposes.
Staff recommends Council introduce the Ordinance in Attachment 4 by title only adding Section 9004 to
Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 1 of Ukiah City Code to require compliance with the Ukiah Municipal Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plan.
Recommended Action: Introduce the Ordinance by title only to add Section 9004 to Division 9, Chapter 2,
Article 1 to require compliance with the Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: David Rapport, City Attorney; Darcy Vaughn, Assistant City Attorney; Mireya Turner,
Planning Manager; Jesse Davis, Planning Manager
Page 162 of 550
Page 3 of 3
Page 163 of 550
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
Attachment 1
Page 164 of 550
Page 165 of 550
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
Adopted
May 20, 2021
PREPARED BY:
Mead & Hunt, Inc.
1360 19th Hole Drive, Suite 200
Windsor, CA 95492
www.meadhunt.com
Maranda Thompson, Project Manager *
Kenneth Brody, Senior Airport Planner *
Cheyenne Engelstad, Planning Technician*
Corbett Smith, Planner *
Todd Eroh, Senior Designer
Krista Robertson, Project Editor
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONERS (ALUC)
Eric Crane, Chairman (Member at Large) *
Randy Beckler, Vice Chairman (City Select) *
Donovan Albright, Commissioner (City Select)
Randy Jacobszoon, Planning Commission Representative
Greg Nelson, Planning Commission Representative *
Leonard Swithenbank, Commissioner (City Select)
Diana Wiedemann, Planning Commission Representative
City of Ukiah
CITY OF UKIAH
Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director *
Jesse Davis, Planning Manager
Greg Owen, Airport Manager *
COUNTY OF MENDOCINO
Brent Schultz, Planning and Building Services Director (Former)*
Ignacio “Nash” Gonzalez, Interim Director
Julia Acker Krog, Assistant Director *
Keith Gronendyke, Planner III
Vandy Vandewater, Planner II *
Amber Munoz, County DOT Liaison *
Adrienne Thompson, Administrative Assistant *
* TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP
A special thank you is extended to the Technical Advisory Group
members for their time and contribution to the preparation of
this Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Page 166 of 550
Page 167 of 550
Table of Contents
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) i–1
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Airport Land Use Compatibility Planning ................................................................................................... 1-1
Function and Applicability of the Plan .............................................................................................. 1-1
Statutory Requirements .................................................................................................................... 1-2
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission .......................................................................... 1-3
Relationship of the ALUC to County and City Governments ........................................................... 1-4
Plan Preparation and Review..................................................................................................................... 1-4
State Guidelines ............................................................................................................................... 1-4
Relationship to Airport Master Plan .................................................................................................. 1-5
Ukiah Municipal Airport Plans .......................................................................................................... 1-5
Compatibility Planning for Ukiah Municipal Airport .......................................................................... 1-6
Plan Implementation .................................................................................................................................. 1-7
General Plan Consistency ................................................................................................................ 1-7
Overrule Process .............................................................................................................................. 1-8
Project Referrals ............................................................................................................................... 1-9
Plan Contents ............................................................................................................................................. 1-9
Chapter 2 – Procedural Policies
General Applicability ......................................................................................................................... 2-1
1.1. Purpose and Use ....................................................................................................................... 2-1
1.2. Definitions ................................................................................................................................... 2-3
1.3. Scope of ALUC Concerns .......................................................................................................... 2-7
1.4. Types of Actions Subject to ALUC Review ................................................................................ 2-8
1.5. Limitations of the ALUC and UKIALUCP ................................................................................. 2-11
ALUC Review Process ................................................................................................................... 2-13
2.1. General ..................................................................................................................................... 2-13
2.2. Review Process for General Plans, Specific Plans, Zoning Ordinances, and Building
Regulations .............................................................................................................................. 2-14
2.3. Review Process for Major Land Use Actions ........................................................................... 2-16
2.4. Review Process for Airport Development Actions ................................................................... 2-19
2.5. Process for Overruling the ALUC ............................................................................................. 2-21
Page 168 of 550
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Chapter 3 – Compatibility Policies
Compatibility Criteria for Land Use Actions ...................................................................................... 3-1
3.1. Evaluating General Plans, Specific Plans, Zoning Ordinances, and Building Regulations ....... 3-1
3.2. Evaluating Proposed Land Use Projects ................................................................................... 3-2
3.3. Criteria for Special Circumstances ............................................................................................. 3-6
3.4. Noise Compatibility Policies ..................................................................................................... 3-11
3.5. Safety Compatibility Policies .................................................................................................... 3-13
3.6. Airspace Protection Compatibility Policies ............................................................................... 3-20
3.7. Overflight Compatibility Policies ............................................................................................... 3-25
3.8. Exceptions to Land Use Criteria............................................................................................... 3-27
3.9. Review Criteria for Ukiah Municipal Airport Development Actions .......................................... 3-28
Tables
3A Basic Compatibility Criteria ...................................................................................................... 3-30
3B Compatibility Zone Delineation ................................................................................................ 3-41
Maps*
3A Compatibility Policy Map ....................................................................................................... ff 3-42
3B Airspace Protection Zones .................................................................................................... ff 3-42
*ff – Front facing, maps follow noted page number
Chapter 4 – Background Data
Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 4-1
Exhibits
4-1 Airport Features Summary ..................................................................................................... 4-5
4-2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Layout Plan ................................................................................... ff 4-6
4-3 Airport Activity Data Summary................................................................................................ 4-7
4-4 Compatibility Factor: Noise .................................................................................................. ff 4-8
4-5 Compatibility Factor: Safety ................................................................................................. ff 4-8
4-6 Compatibility Factor: Overflight ........................................................................................... ff 4-8
4-7 Compatibility Factor: Airspace ............................................................................................. ff 4-8
4-8 Airport Environs Information ................................................................................................... 4-9
4-9 County of Mendocino General Plan Land Uses ................................................................ ff 4-10
4-10 City of Ukiah General Land Uses ...................................................................................... ff 4-10
Page 169 of 550
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) i–3
Appendices
A State Laws Related to Airport Land Use Planning
B Code of Federal Regulations Part 77
C Airport Land Use Compatibility Concepts, Table C1, Figure C1
D Methods for Determining Concentrations of People
E Project Referral Form
F General Plan Consistency Checklist
G Sample Implementation Documents
H Glossary of Terms
Attachments
A ALUCP Adoption Resolution
B ALUCP Notice of Determination
Page 170 of 550
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This page left intentionally blank
Page 171 of 550
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Page 172 of 550
Page 173 of 550
1
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 1–1
Introduction
A IRPORT L AND U SE C OMPATIBILITY P LANNING
This Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP) replaces the compatibility plan for
Ukiah Municipal Airport adopted by the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) in
1996 as part of the countywide Mendocino County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (MCACLUP). The
UKIALUCP is wholly self-contained and does not rely upon any policies or other content contained in
the MCALUCP. The MCALUCP remains in effect for other airports in Mendocino County.
Function and Applicability of the Plan
The basic function of this UKIALUCP is to promote compatibility between the airport and surrounding
land uses. As adopted by the ALUC, the plan serves as a tool for use by the Commission in fulfilling its
duty to review certain airport and adjacent land use proposals. Additionally, the plan sets compatibility
criteria applicable to local agencies in their preparation or amendment of land use plans and ordinances
and to landowners in their design of new development.
The Ukiah Municipal Airport is located in the southeastern portion of Mendocino County. The influence
area for the Ukiah Municipal Airport, as defined herein, extends 2.7 miles from the airport’s runway. This
influence area encompasses land within two local government jurisdictions:
• County of Mendocino
• City of Ukiah
Additionally, any city, special district, community college district, or school district that exists or may be
established or expanded into the Airport Influence Area defined by this UKIALUCP is also subject to the
provisions of the plan. The authority of the ALUC does not extend to state, federal, or tribal lands. Details
regarding the purpose, scope, and applicability of the UKIALUCP are set forth in the policy chapters that
follow.
Page 174 of 550
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Statutory Requirements
Powers and Duties
Requirements for creation of Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUCs) were first established under the
California State Aeronautics Act1 in 1967. Although the law has been amended numerous times since then,
the fundamental purpose of ALUCs, to promote land use compatibility around airports, has remained
unchanged. As expressed in the present statutes, this purpose is:
“...to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports
and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive
noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas
are not already devoted to incompatible uses.”
The statutes give ALUCs two principal powers by which to accomplish this objective:
1. ALUCs must prepare and adopt an airport land use plan; and
2. ALUCs must review the plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies and airport
operators for consistency with that plan.
Limitations
The statutes also have two explicit limitations on the powers of ALUCs. Specifically, ALUCs have no
authority over existing land uses2 or over the operation of airports.3 Neither of these terms is defined within
the statutes, although the interpretation of their meaning is fairly standard throughout the state.
• Existing Land Uses—The precise wording of the Aeronautics Act is that the authority of ALUCs
extends only to land in the vicinity of airports that is “not already devoted to incompatible uses.”
The working interpretation of this language is that ALUCs have no state-empowered authority
over existing land uses. The question then becomes one of determining what conditions qualify a
land use as existing.
For airport land use planning purposes, a land use can generally be considered existing once the
local agency has completed all discretionary actions on the project and only ministerial approvals
remain. A vacant property thus can be considered “devoted to” a particular use, even if the activity
has not begun, once local government commitments and substantial construction investments by
the property owner make it infeasible for the property to be used for anything other than its
proposed use. Local agency commitment to a proposal can usually be considered firm once a
vesting tentative map, development agreement, certain discretionary permits, or other land use
entitlement has been approved.
1 Public Utility Code Sections 21670 et seq.
2 Public Utilities Code Section 21674(a).
3 Public Utilities Code Section 21674(e).
Page 175 of 550
INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 1–3
• Operation of Airports—Any actions pertaining to how and where aircraft operate on the ground
or in the air around an airport are not within the jurisdiction of ALUC s to regulate. ALUC
involvement with aircraft operations is limited to taking the operational characteristics into account
in the development of land use compatibility plans. This limitation on the jurisdiction of ALUCs
cannot, however, be taken to mean that they have no authority with respect to new development
on airport property. For example, the law specifically requires ALUCs to review proposed airport
master plans for consistency with the commission’s plans.4 ALUCs also are generally conceded to
have authority to review proposals for nonaviation development on airport property.
A third, less absolute, limitation concerns the types of land use actions that are subject to ALUC review.
The law emphasizes local general plans as the primary mechanism for implementing the compatibility
policies set forth in an ALUC’s plan. Thus, each land use jurisdiction affected by this UKIALUCP is
required to make its general plan consistent with the ALUC plan (or to overrule the Commission). Once a
local agency has taken this action to the satisfaction of the ALUC, the ALUC’s authority to review projects
within that jurisdiction is narrowly limited. The only actions for which review remains mandatory are
proposed adoption or amendment of general plans, specific plans, zoning ordinances, and building
regulations (building codes) affecting land within an airport influence area. For an ALUC to review
individual projects, the local agency must agree to submit them.
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission
State law provides two basic options regarding the structure of airport land use commissions: 1) a standard
format, or 2) designation of an existing body to serve as the ALUC. Among California’s 58 counties, these
two formats are used in roughly equal proportions.
Membership on ALUCs structured in the standard manner is specified to be as follows:
• Two members appointed by the county board of supervisors,
• Two members appointed by a selection committee of mayors of the county’s cities,
• Two members appointed by airport managers, and
• A seventh member, representing the general public, appointed by the other six members.
The designated body format has several possibilities. Most common is for a single- or multi-county council
of governments, transportation planning agency, or similar entity to be designated as the ALUC. Other
types of bodies that serve as ALUCs in some counties include the county planning commission, the county
airport commission, or the county board of supervisors.
The Mendocino County ALUC was formed in 1993. Its composition, a variation of the standard format,
consists of seven members: three County Planning Commission members appointed by the Board of
Supervisors, three members appointed by the city selection committee, and one member at large appointed
by the other six commissioners.
4 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(c).
Page 176 of 550
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Relationship of the ALUC to County and City Governments
The fundamental relationship between the ALUC and the governments of Mendocino County and the
City of Ukiah is set by the State Aeronautics Act. Within the bounds defined by state law, the decisions of
the ALUC are final and are independent of the Board of Supervisors or City Council. The ALUC does not
need county or city approval in order to adopt this UKIALUCP or to carry out ALUC land use project
review responsibilities. However, the ALUC must consult with the involved agencies regarding
establishment of the airport influence area boundary.5
Another aspect of the relationship between the ALUC and county and city governments concerns
implementation of the UKIALUCP. The ALUC has the sole authority to adopt this plan and to conduct
compatibility reviews, but, as noted earlier, the authority and responsibility for implementing the
compatibility policies rests with the local agencies.
The California Government Code6 establishes that each county and city affected by an airport land use
compatibility plan must make its general plan and any applicable specific plans consistent with the ALUC’s
plan. Alternatively, local agencies can take the series of steps listed in the Public Utilities Code7 to overrule
the ALUC. Actions that Mendocino County and the City of Ukiah can take to implement the UKIALUCP
or overrule the ALUC are outlined later in this chapter.
P LAN P REPARATION AND R EVIEW
State Guidelines
Although state law spells out the powers and duties of airport land use commissions and many of the
procedural aspects of airport land use compatibility planning, it does not contain explicit compatibility
guidelines. Rather, the law refers to another document, the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook)
published by the California Division of Aeronautics. Specifically, the statutes say that when preparing
compatibility plans for individual airports, ALUCs shall “be guided by” the information contai ned in the
Handbook.
The Handbook deals with the formation and operation of ALUCs, the preparation of compatibility plans,
procedures for review of local actions, and the responsibilities of local agencies. The Handbook also sets
forth basic guidelines for land use compatibility criteria. This guidance is intended to serve as the starting
point for compatibility planning around individual airports. The Handbook is not regulatory in nature and
does not constitute formal state policy. The most recent edition of the Handbook was completed in October
2011 and is available for downloading from the Division of Aeronautics website: https://dot.ca.gov/-
/media/dot-media/programs/aeronautics/documents/californiaairportlanduseplanninghandbook-
a11y.pdf
5 Public Utilities Code Section 21675(c).
6 Government Code Section 65302.3.
7 Public Utilities Code Section 21676.
Page 177 of 550
INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 1–5
An additional function of the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook is established elsewhere in California state
law. The Public Resources Code creates a tie between the Handbook and California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) documents. Specifically, Section 21096 requires that lead agencies must use the Handbook as
“a technical resource” when assessing airport-related noise and safety impacts of projects located in the
vicinity of airports.
The policies and maps in this UKIALUCP take into account the guidance provided by the current edition
of the Handbook, dated October 2011. This edition refined, clarified, and reorganized the content of the
2002 edition, but did not appreciably change the state guidance.
Relationship to Airport Master Plan
Airport land use compatibility plans are distinct from airport master plans in function and content. In
simple terms, the issues addressed by airport master plans are primarily on-airport, whereas those of
concern in a compatibility plan are off-airport. The purpose of airport master plans is to assess the demand
for airport facilities and to guide the development necessa ry to meet those demands. An airport master
plan is prepared for and adopted by the agency that owns and/or operates the airport. In contrast, the
purpose of a compatibility plan is to assure that incompatible development does not occur on lands
surrounding the airport. The responsibility for preparation and adoption of compatibility plans lies with
each county’s airport land use commission.
This distinction notwithstanding, the relationship between the two types of plans is close. Specifically, the
Public Utilities Code8 requires that ALUC plans be based upon a long-range airport master plan adopted
by the airport owner/proprietor. If such a plan does not exist for a particular airport, an airport layout plan
may be used subject to approval by the California Division of Aeronautics.9 Furthermore, ALUC plans
must reflect “the anticipated growth of the airport during at least the next 20 years.”
The connection works in both directions, however. While a compatibility plan must be based upon an
airport master plan, the Public Utilities Code10 also requires that any proposed modification to an airport
master plan be submitted to the ALUC to determine if the proposal is consistent with the compatibility
plan. Provided that the off-airport compatibility implications of the proposed modifications are adequately
addressed in the master plan, the outcome of this process usually is that the compatibility plan will need to
be updated to mirror the new master plan.
Ukiah Municipal Airport Plans
The responsibility for master planning of the Ukiah Municipal Airport rests with the airport’s proprietor,
the City of Ukiah. The current master plan for the Ukiah Municipal Airport was adopted by the city in
1996. The Airport Layout Plan drawing was approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in
January 2016 and illustrates proposed alterations to the airfield system. The principal development proposal
shown on the Airport Layout Plan is extending the Runway 15 end 465 feet north.
In November 2020, the Ukiah City Council unanimously approved a recommendation to the ALUC that
the UKIALUCP protect for a future 5,000-foot runway to accommodate operations by CalFire Lockheed
8 Public Utilities Code Section 21675(a).
9 In May 2019, Caltrans approved the January 2016 Airport Layout Plan for use as the aeronautical basis for this UKIALUCP.
10 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(c).
Page 178 of 550
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
C-130 fire attack aircraft. Although this runway length is not specifically depicted in th e 2016 Airport
Layout Plan drawing, features including avigation easement acquisition that are shown on the drawing
support this option. At its meeting on November 19, 2020, the Mendocino County ALUC directed ALUC
staff and Mead & Hunt to revise the draft UKIALUCP as recommended by the Ukiah City Council. The
city’s recommendation and ALUC direction are reflected in the compatibility map and criteria contained
in Chapter 3 of this UKIALUCP.
With respect to aircraft activity projections, a 20-year activity forecast of 30,916 annual operations was
developed for the purposes of this UKIALUCP. This forecast is double the current (2019) activity level of
15,458 annual operations and is representative of the airport’s current condition and potential growth.
In accordance with state law, the features of the Ukiah Municipal Airport development proposals having
implications for off-airport land use have been taken into account in the preparation of this UKIALUCP.
In particular, the role of the airport and the planned long-term development of the runway system as
identified in the Airport Layout Plan were major inputs to the compatibility policies set forth herein.
Compatibility Planning for Ukiah Municipal Airport
The Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission adopted the original countywide compatibility
plan—entitled Mendocino County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (MCACLUP)—on October 21, 1993;
the plan was revised June 6, 1996, to include the Ukiah Municipal Airport. The 1996 plan was based upon
the development proposals provided in the 1996 Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan, a plan which no
longer fully reflects the city’s planning for the airport. The MCACLUP also predates the latest guidance
provided by Caltrans in the 2011 Handbook. Consequently, for both of these reasons, the MCACLUP is
outdated.
The planning effort to prepare an updated compatibility plan for the Ukiah Municipal Airport was initiated
by the City of Ukiah with support from the County of Mendocino and the Mendocino County Airport
Land Use Commission. As part of the planning process, a Technical Advisory Group was established
specifically for the project. The group’s membership consisted of County and City Planning staff members,
the Ukiah Municipal Airport Manager, a County Department of Transportation representative, and
representatives of the ALUC. The Technical Advisory Group assisted with providing airport and land use
data, reviewing discussion papers and draft materials, and provided comments for consideration in the
draft UKIALUCP.
An Initial Study of environmental impacts has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Issues addressed include those identified in the 2007 California
Supreme Court decision in Muzzy Ranch Company v. Solano Airport Land Use Commission. These issues include
assessment of the potential future displacement of residential and nonresidential land use development as
a result of implementation of this UKIALUCP. A copy of the Initial Study and associated Negative
Declaration was circulated for public review and comment on July 21, 2020 together with a Public Review
draft of this UKIALUCP.
Subsequently, revisions were made to the Public Review Draft in response to the November 2020 ALUC
direction regarding accommodation of the CalFire Lockheed C-130 fire attack aircraft. The primary change
was to add a Compatibility Zone 1* beyond Zone 1 at each end of the runway. These text and map
revisions, together with various minor wording clarifications, were documented in Addendum #1, dated
January 14, 2021. The environmental impacts of the addition of the Zone 1*s, the potential for
displacement in particular, were examined and found to be the same or less than existed under the 1996
MCALUCP and less than significant in terms of CEQA.
Page 179 of 550
INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 1–7
This supplemental analysis was included in the revised Initial Study and Negative Declaration (January
2021) which were made public but not formally recirculated consistent with Title 14, California Code of
Regulation, Section 15073.5(C)(2).
The Final Draft UKIALUCP, including the revisions listed in Addendum #1, was adopted by the ALUC
on May 20, 2021. The associated Negative Declaration was also approved by the ALUC at that time. This
adopted UKIALUCP document contains the Addendum #1 revisions and replaces the earlier Mendocino
County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (MCACLUP) addressing the Ukiah Municipal Airport (adopted
1993, revised 1996)
P LAN I MPLEMENTATION
General Plan Consistency
As noted above, state law requires each local agency having jurisdiction over land uses within an ALUC’s
planning area to modify its general plan and any affected specific plans to be consistent with the
compatibility plan. The law says that the local agency must take this action within 180 days of when the
ALUC adopts or amends its plan. The only other course of action available to local agencies is to overrule
the ALUC by a two-thirds vote11 after first holding a public hearing and making findings that the agency’s
plans are consistent with the intent of state airport land use planning statutes.
A general plan does not need to be identical with the ALUC plan in order to be consistent with it. To meet
the consistency test, a general plan must do two things:
• It must specifically address compatibility planning issues, either directly or through reference to a
zoning ordinance or other policy document; and
• It must avoid direct conflicts with compatibility planning criteria.
Many community general plans pay little attention to the noise and safety factors associated with air port
land use compatibility. Also, some of the designated land uses of property near an airport frequently are
contrary to good compatibility planning. It is anticipated that each of the land use jurisdictions affected by
this UKIALUCP will need to make some modification to its general plan and/or other land use policy
documents in order to meet the plan consistency requirements. (Note: An initial assessment of the
consistency between the current local general plans and the policies set forth in this UKIALCUP is
contained in Appendix E).
Compatibility planning issues can be reflected in a general plan in several ways:
Incorporate Policies into Existing General Plan Elements—One method of achieving the necessary
planning consistency is to modify existing general plan elements. For example, airport land use noise
policies could be inserted into the noise element, safety policies could be placed into a safety element, and
the primary compatibility criteria and associated maps plus the procedural policies might fit into the land
use element.
11 “A two-thirds vote of the entire membership of a city council is not required to override an adverse det ermination made by
an airport land use commission concerning the city's proposed amendment of its general plan; a two -thirds vote of the members
constituting a quorum is sufficient to override the determination.” California Attorney General Opinion 91-502; published March 18,
1992.
Page 180 of 550
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1–8 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
With this approach, direct conflicts would be eliminated and the majority of the mechanisms and
procedures to ensure compliance with compatibility criteria could be fully incorporated into a local
jurisdiction’s general plan.
Adopt a General Plan Airport Element—Another approach is to prepare a separate airport element of
the general plan. Such a format may be advantageous when a community’s general plan also needs to
address on-airport development and operational issues. Modification of other plan elements to provide
cross referencing and eliminate conflicts would still be necessary.
Adopt Compatibility Plan as Stand-Alone Document—Jurisdictions selecting this option would simply
adopt the relevant portions of the UKIALCUP as a local policy document—specifically, Chapter 2 plus
any background information they wish to include. Changes to the community’s existing general plan would
be minimal. Policy reference to the separate UKIALUCP document would need to be added and any direct
land use or other conflicts with compatibility planning criteria would have to be removed. Limited
discussion of compatibility planning issues could be included in the general plan, but the substance of most
compatibility policies would appear only in the stand-alone document.
Adopt Airport Combining District or Overlay Zoning Ordinance—This approach is similar to the
stand-alone document except that the local jurisdiction would not explicitly adopt the UKIALUCP as
policy. Instead, the compatibility policies would be restructured as an airport combining or overlay zoning
ordinance. A combining zone serves as an overlay of standard community-wide land use zones and
modifies or limits the uses permitted by the underlying zone. Flood hazard combining zoning is a common
example. An airport combining zone ordinance can serve as a convenient means of bringing various airport
compatibility criteria into one place. The airport-related height-limit zoning that many jurisdictions have
adopted as a means of protecting airport airspace is a form of combining district zoning. Noise and safety
compatibility criteria, together with procedural policies, would need to be added to create a complete
airport compatibility zoning ordinance. Other than where direct conflicts need to be eliminated from the
local plans, implementation of the compatibility policies would be accomplished solely through the zoning
ordinance. Policy reference to airport compatibility in the general plan could be as simple as mentioning
support for the airport land use commission and stating that policy implementation is by means of the
combining zone (An outline of topics which could be addressed in an airport combining zone is included
in Appendix F).
Overrule Process
The only other course of action available to local agencies is to overrule the ALUC by a two-thirds vote of
its governing body after making findings that the agency’s plans are consistent with the intent of state
airport land use planning statutes. Additionally, the local agency must provide both the ALUC and Caltrans
Division of Aeronautics with a copy of the local agency’s proposed decision and findings at least 45 days
in advance of its decision to overrule and must hold a public hearing on the proposed overruling.12 The
ALUC and the Division of Aeronautics may provide comments to the local agency within 30 days of
receiving the proposed decision and findings.
12 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a) and (b).
Page 181 of 550
INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 1–9
If comments are submitted, the local agency must include them in the public record of the final decision
to overrule the ALUC.13 Note that similar requirements apply to local agency overruling of ALUC actions
concerning individual development proposals for which ALUC review is mandatory 14 and airport master
plans.15
Project Referrals
In addition to the types of land use actions for which referral to the ALUC is mandatory in accordance
with state law (e.g., general plans, specific plans), the UKIALUCP specifies other major land use projects
that either must or can be submitted for review. These major land use actions are defined in Chapter 2.
Beginning with when this UKIALUCP is adopted by the ALUC and continuing until such time as local
agencies have made the necessary modifications to their general plans, all of these major land use actions
are to be submitted to the ALUC for review. After local agencies have made their general plans consistent
with the UKIALUCP, local agencies may choose to voluntarily refer to the ALUC or ALUC Secretary land
use actions involving a question of compatibility with airport activities. However, such referrals are
voluntary, informal, and constitute consultation rather than formal reviews. These referral procedures must
be indicated in the local jurisdiction’s general plan or other implementing policy document in order for the
general plan to be considered fully consistent with the UKIALUCP.
P LAN C ONTENTS
The UKIALUCP is organized into four chapters and a set of appendices. The intent of this introductory
chapter is to set the overall context of airport land use compatibility planning in general and for the Ukiah
Municipal Airport and Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission in particular.
The policies and maps in Chapters 2 and 3 constitute the most important components of the plan. The
policies in Chapter 2 establish procedures by which the ALUC operates and conducts compatibility reviews
of land use and airport development proposals affecting Ukiah Municipal Airport. The policies also define
the types of actions to be submitted for ALUC review and the procedures that the ALUC will follow in
making compatibility determinations. Chapter 3 specifies the compatibility criteria for future land use
development in the Ukiah Municipal Airport environs.
Chapter 4 presents various background data regarding features, impacts, and environs of Ukiah Municipal
Airport. Chapter 4 also serves to document the data and assumptions upon which the compatibility policy
maps for the airport are based.
Also included in this document are a set of appendices containing a copy of state statutes concerning
airport land use commissions and other general information pertaining to airport land use compatibility
planning. This material is mostly taken from other sources and does not represent ALUC policy except
where cited as such in Chapters 2 and 3—specifically the state ALUC statutes and certain other laws
(Appendix A) and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 77 (Appendix B).
13 Public Utilities Code Sections 21676, 21676.5 and 21677.
14 Public Utilities Code Section 21676.5(a).
15 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(c).
Page 182 of 550
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1–10 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This page left intentionally blank
Page 183 of 550
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
CHAPTER 2
PROCEDURAL POLICIES
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Page 184 of 550
Page 185 of 550
2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–1
Procedural Policies
G ENERAL A PPLICABILITY
1.1. Purpose and Use
1.1.1. Basic Purpose: The purpose of this Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(UKIALUCP) is to articulate procedures and criteria applicable to airport land use
compatibility planning involving Ukiah Municipal Airport (Airport), a public-use general
aviation airport owned by the City of Ukiah. The UKIALUCP is prepared in accordance
with the requirements of the California State Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code Section
21670 et seq.) and guidance provided in the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
(Handbook) published by the California Department of Transportation Division of
Aeronautics in October 2011.
1.1.2. Use by Mendocino County ALUC: The Mendocino County ALUC (ALUC) shall:
(a) Formally adopt this UKIALUCP1 and amend it as necessary to reflect current Airport
plans.2
(b) When a Land Use Action is referred for review as dictated by Section 1.4, make a
determination as to whether such Land Use Action is consistent with the criteria set forth
in this UKIALUCP.
(c) When an Airport Development Action is referred for review as dictated by Policy 1.4.4,
make a determination as to whether such Airport Development Action is consistent with
the criteria set forth in this UKIALUCP.
1.1.3. Use by City of Ukiah: The City of Ukiah shall:
(a) When required by Section 1.4 of this UKIALUCP, refer Land Use Actions and Airport
Development Actions to the ALUC for a consistency determination. Also, as encouraged
by the ALUC in Policy 1.4.3, submit for ALUC comment (not a formal consistency
determination) proposed Major Land Use Actions for which referral is voluntary.
1 In accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 21674(c).
2 In accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 21675(a).
Page 186 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(b) Modify its general plan, applicable specific plan(s), zoning ordinance, and building
regulations to be consistent with the policies in this UKIALUCP or take the steps
necessary to Overrule the ALUC (see Section 2.5).
(c) Utilize the UKIALUCP, either directly or as reflected in the appropriately modified
general plan, specific plan, and zoning ordinance, when making other planning decisions
regarding proposed Land Use Actions within the Airport Influence Area.
(d) When preparing an environmental document for any Land Use Action within the Airport
Influence Area, address the compatibility criteria contained in this UKIALUCP in addition
to referencing guidance from the Handbook.3
(e) As owner of Ukiah Municipal Airport, refer proposed Airport Development Actions
(including new or revised airport master plans, airport layout plans, and certain other
airport improvement plans) to the ALUC for a consistency determination (see Policy
1.4.4).
1.1.4. Use by County of Mendocino: The County of Mendocino shall:
(a) When required by Section 1.4 of this UKIALUCP, refer Land Use Actions to the ALUC
for a consistency determination. Also, as encouraged by the ALUC in Policy 1.4.3,
submit for ALUC comment (not a formal consistency determination) proposed Major
Land Use Actions for which referral is voluntary.
(b) Modify its general plan, applicable specific plan(s), zoning ordinance, and building
regulations to be consistent with the policies in this UKIALUCP or take the steps
necessary to Overrule the ALUC (see Section 2.5).
(c) Utilize the UKIALUCP, either directly or as reflected in the appropriately modified
general plan, specific plan, and zoning ordinance, when making other planning decisions
regarding the proposed Land Use Actions within the Airport Influence Area.
(d) When preparing an environmental document for any Land Use Action within the Airport
Influence Area, address the compatibility criteria contained in this UKIALUCP in addition
to referencing guidance from the Handbook.4
1.1.5. Use by Other Local Government Agencies: Any existing or future special districts, school districts,
or community college districts5 whose boundaries extend into the Ukiah Municipal Airport
Influence Area, as defined herein, shall:
(a) As specified by Section 1.4 of this UKIALUCP, refer Land Use Actions to the ALUC for
a consistency determination.
(b) Apply the policies of this UKIALUCP when creating plans or taking other Land Use
Actions regarding proposed facilities and other development affecting or affected by
airport operations or take the steps necessary to Overrule the ALUC (see Section 2.5).
3 The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires environmental documents for projects situated within an airport
influence area to evaluate whether the project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive levels
of airport-related noise or to airport-related safety hazards (Public Resources Code Section 21096). In the preparation of such
environmental documents, the law specifically requires that the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook published by the California
Division of Aeronautic be utilized as a technical resource.
4 See preceding footnote.
5 Public Utilities Code Section 21670(f) specifically includes special districts, school districts, and community college districts as
among the Local Agencies subject to the airport land use compatibility planning provisions of the Aeronautics Act.
Page 187 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–3
1.1.6. Relationship to Other ALUCPs Adopted by ALUC: This UKIALUCP rescinds and replaces the
Compatibility Plan for the Ukiah Municipal Airport adopted by the ALUC in 1996 and
included within the Mendocino County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (MCACLUP),
which applies to all of the public-use airports in Mendocino County. None of the policies
of the 1996 plan continue to apply to compatibility planning within the environs of the
Ukiah Municipal Airport.
(a) No future amendments to the MCACLUP shall apply to the environs of Ukiah Municipal
Airport unless separately adopted as an amendment to this UKIALUCP.
(b) No court action to invalidate all or any portion of this UKIALUCP shall have an effect
on the MCACLUP unless explicitly so stated.
1.1.7. Effective Date:
(a) The policies herein are effective as of the date that the ALUC adopts this UKIALUCP.
(b) Any Project or phase of a Project that has received Local Agency approvals sufficient to
qualify it as an Existing Land Use (see Policies 1.2.18 and 1.5.3) prior to the date of the
ALUC’s adoption of the UKIALUCPs shall not be required to comply with the policies
herein. Rather, the policies of the 1996 Ukiah Municipal Airport section of the
MCACLUP shall apply.
1.2. Definitions
The following definitions apply for the purposes of the policies set forth in this UKIALUCP.
Words listed here appear in Italics when used in this chapter or in Chapter 3. In addition, general
terms pertaining to airports and land use planning are defined in the Glossary (Appendix H).
1.2.1. Aeronautics Act (also known as the California State Aeronautics Act): Except as indicated
otherwise, the article of the California Public Utilities Code Section 21670 et seq., pertaining
to airport land use commissions and airport land use compatibility planning.
1.2.2. Airport: Ukiah Municipal Airport.
1.2.3. Airport Development Action: Any of several types of actions that may be taken by the City of
Ukiah as airport owner and for which referral to the ALUC is required (see Policy 1.4.4).
1.2.4. Airport Influence Area: The area, as shown in Map 3A, in which current or future airport-
related noise, overflight, safety, or airspace protection factors may significantly affect land
uses or necessitate restrictions on those uses. The Airport Influence Area constitutes the area
within which certain Land Use Actions are subject to ALUC review. The term Airport Influence
Area is synonymous with the term Referral Area as well as with the term “planning area” as
used in Public Utilities Code Section 21675.
1.2.5. Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC): The Mendocino County Airport Land Use
Commission.
1.2.6. Airport Land Use Commission Secretary: The Director of the Mendocino County Department
of Planning and Building Services or a person designated by the Director.
1.2.7. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP): This document, the Ukiah Municipal Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP).
1.2.8. Airport Proximity Disclosure: A form of buyer awareness documentation required by California
state law and applicable to many transactions involving residential real estate, which includes
Page 188 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
previously occupied dwellings. The disclosure notifies a prospective purchaser that the
property is located in proximity to an airport and may be subject to annoyances and
inconveniences associated with the flight of aircraft to, from, and around the airport. See
Policy 3.7.2 for applicability to Ukiah Municipal Airport. Also see Policy 1.2.34 for a related
buyer awareness tool, Recorded Overflight Notification.
1.2.9. Airspace Critical Protection Zone: The 14 CFR Part 77 primary surface and the area beneath
portions of the approach and transitional surfaces to where these surfaces intersect with the
horizontal surface together with the Airspace High Terrain Zone. See details in Policy 3.6.1(c).
1.2.10. Airspace High Terrain Zone: High terrain areas where review of and control over the height of
objects is particularly important to the protection of the Airport airspace. See details in Policy
3.6.1.
1.2.11. Airspace Protection (Part 77) Surfaces/Plans/Zones: Imaginary surfaces in the airspace
surrounding an Airport defined in accordance with criteria set forth in Title 14 Code of
Federal Regulations Part 77 (14 CFR Part 77), Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation of the Navigable
Airspace.6 These surfaces establish the maximum height that objects on the ground can reach
without potentially creating constraints or hazards to the use of the airspace by aircraft
approaching, departing, or maneuvering in the vicinity of airports. The Airspace Protection
Zones for Ukiah Municipal Airport are depicted in Map 3B, Airspace Protection Zones, in
Chapter 3 herein.
1.2.12. Aviation-Related Use: Any facility or activity directly associated with the air transportation of
persons or cargo or the operation, storage, or maintenance of aircraft at the Airport. Such
uses specifically include, but are not limited to, runways, taxiways, and their associat ed
protection areas defined by the Federal Aviation Administration, together with aircraft
aprons, hangars, fixed base operations facilities, terminal buildings, etc. Hotels or other
commercial/industrial facilities on Airport property do not qualify as an Aviation-Related Use.
1.2.13. Avigation Easement: An easement that conveys rights associated with aircraft overflight of a
property, including, but not limited to, creation of noise and limits on the height of
structures and trees, etc. (See Policy 3.3.6.)
1.2.14. Building Regulations: Terminology used in state ALUC statutes. Also known as “building
codes,” a set of rules that specify the standards for constructed objects such as buildings
and nonbuilding structures.
1.2.15. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): The noise metric adopted by the State of California
for land use planning purposes, including describing airport noise impacts. The noise
impacts are typically depicted by a set of contours, each of which represents points having
the same CNEL value.
1.2.16. Compatibility Zone: Any of the zones depicted in the Compatibility Policy Map for the Airport in
Chapter 3 for the purposes of assessing land use compatibility within the Airport Influence
Area defined herein. (See Policy 1.3.1.)
6 Code of Federal Regulations that deal with objects affecting navigable airspace in the vicinity an airport. Objects that exceed
the 14 CFR Part 77 height limits constitute airspace obstructions. 14 CFR Part 77 establishes standards for identifying
obstructions to navigable airspace, sets forth requirements for notice to the FAA of certain proposed construction or
alteration, and provides for aeronautical studies of obstructions to determine their effect on the safe and efficient use of
airspace. (See Appendix B for a copy of the 14 CFR Part 77.)
Page 189 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–5
1.2.17. Density: The number of dwelling units per acre. Density is used in this UKIALUCP as the
measure by which proposed residential Land Use Actions are evaluated for compliance with
noise and safety compatibility criteria (compare Intensity). Density is calculated based on the
overall site size (i.e., total acreage of the project site).
1.2.18. Existing Land Use: A land use that, as of the effective date of this UKIALUCP (see Policy
1.1.7) either physically exists or for which Local Agency commitments to the proposal have
been obtained entitling the Project to move forward. (See Policy 1.5.3.) The policies of this
UKIALUCP do not apply to Existing Land Uses.7
1.2.19. Handbook: The California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook) published by the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Division of Aeronautics.8 The
Handbook provides guidance to ALUCs for the preparation, adoption, and amendment of
airport land use compatibility plans.
1.2.20. Infill: Development of vacant or underutilized land (e.g., Redevelopment or expansion of
existing facilities) within areas that are already largely developed or used more intensively.
See Policy 3.3.4for criteria used to identify Infill areas for the purposes of this UKIALUCP.
1.2.21. Intensity: The number of people per acre. Intensity is used in this UKIALUCP as the measure
by which most proposed nonresidential Land Use Actions are evaluated for compliance with
safety compatibility criteria (compare Density). Sitewide average Intensity is calculated based
on the overall site size (i.e., total acreage of the site).
1.2.22. Land Use Action: Any type of land use matter including, but not limited to, land use plans
and individual development proposals or Projects for which Local Agency action is required
and which are subject to the provisions of this UKIALUCP.
1.2.23. Local Agency: The County of Mendocino, City of Ukiah, or any special district, school district,
or community college district—including any future city or district—having any
jurisdictional territory lying within the Airport Influence Area as defined herein for the Ukiah
Municipal Airport. These entities are subject to the provisions of this UKIALUCP (see
Policies 1.1.3, 1.1.4, and 1.1.5). State and federal government agencies and Native American
tribes are not considered Local Agencies.
1.2.24. Major Land Use Action: Land Use Actions related to proposed land uses for which compatibility
with Airport activity is a particular concern, but for which ALUC review is not always
mandatory under state law. These types of Land Use Actions are listed in Policy 1.4.5.
1.2.25. Noise Impact Area: The area within which the noise impacts (measured in terms of CNEL)
generated by the Airport may represent a land use compatibility concern. The noise impact
area for the Airport is presented in Chapter 4, Exhibit 4-4.
1.2.26. Noise-Sensitive Land Uses: Land uses for which the associated primary activities, whether
indoor or outdoor, are susceptible to disruption by loud noise events. The most common
types of noise sensitive land uses include, but are not limited to: residen ces, hospitals,
nursing facilities, intermediate care facilities, educational facilities, libraries, museums, places
of worship, child-care facilities, and certain types of passive recreational parks and open
space.
7 This is an explicit limitation of Public Utilities Code Sections 21670(a) and 21674(a).
8 As of preparation of the UKIALUCP in 2019, the current edition of the Handbook is dated October 2011.
Page 190 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
1.2.27. Nonconforming Use: An Existing Land Use that does not comply with the compatibility criteria
set forth in this UKIALUCP. See Policy 1.5.3(d) for criteria applicable to Land Use Actions
involving Nonconforming Uses.
1.2.28. Object Free Area (OFA): An area on the ground surrounding an airport runway within which
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) prohibits all objects except certain ones
necessary for aircraft navigation or maneuvering. The Airport OFA dimensions to be applied
for the purposes of this UKIALUCP are as established by the FAA.
1.2.29. Occupancy Load Factor: The number of square feet of building floor area occupied per person
under typical peak-period usage.
1.2.30. Overrule: An action that a Local Agency can take in accordance with provisions of state law if
the Local Agency wishes to proceed with adoption or amendment of a general plan or specific
plan, adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation, approval or
modification of a facility master plan, or modification of an airport master plan9 or, under
conditions specified in Policy 1.4.2, a Major Land Use Action10 affecting the Airport Influence
Area, despite an ALUC finding that the proposed Land Use Action is inconsistent with this
UKIALUCP. See Section 2.5 for process required to Overrule the ALUC. Similar Overrule
provisions are also available to the City of Ukiah as Airport owner if the ALUC finds a
proposed airport master plan inconsistent with the UKIALUCP.
1.2.31. Project: A type of Land Use Action or Airport Development Action that involves development of
a specific site (as opposed to a plan, ordinance, or regulation that applies throughout a Local
Agency’s jurisdiction).
1.2.32. Rare Special Events: Events (such as an air show at the Airport or golf tournament) for which
a facility is not designed and normally not used and for which extra safety precautions can
be taken as appropriate.
1.2.33. Reconstruction: The rebuilding of a structure housing a Nonconforming Existing Land Use when
the structure has been fully or partially destroyed as a result of a calamity (not planned
Reconstruction or Redevelopment). See Policy 3.3.4.
1.2.34. Recorded Overflight Notification: A form of buyer awareness documentation recorded in the
chain of title of a property stating that the property may be subject to annoyances and
inconveniences associated with the flight of aircraft to, from, and around a nearby airport.
Unlike an Avigation Easement (see Policy 1.2.13), a Recorded Overflight Notification does not
convey property rights from the property owner to the Airport and does not restrict the
height of objects. See Policy 3.7.1 for applicability. Also see Policy 3.7.2 for a related buyer
awareness tool, Airport Proximity Disclosure.
1.2.35. Redevelopment: Any new construction that replaces the Existing Land Use of a site and would
be inconsistent with the compatibility criteria and policies in Chapter 3 of the UKIALUCP.
Projects involving Redevelopment are subject to the provisions of this UKIALUCP to the same
extent as with other types of Land Use Actions.
1.2.36. Referral Area: See Airport Influence Area.
9 Public Utilities Code Sections 21676(a), (b), and (c).
10 Public Utilities Code Section 21676.5(a).
Page 191 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–7
1.2.37. Risk-Sensitive Land Use: A land use that represents special safety concerns irrespective of the
number of people associated with the use (see Policy 3.5.5). Specifically: uses with vulnerable
occupants, hazardous materials storage, or critical community infrastructure.
1.2.38. Rural Environment: Areas where the predominant land use is natural or agricultural and where
buildings are scattered.
1.2.39. Suburban Environment: Areas characterized by low- to-moderate intensity (1-2 story)
development with surface parking.
1.2.40. Urban Environment: Areas with mid-rise (up to 5 stories) development that generally include
surface vehicle parking with some parking structures.
1.2.41. Urban Overlay Zone: Land underlying Compatibility Zones 3 and 4 to the north within the City
of Ukiah and Compatibility Zone 4 to the southwest in unincorporated Mendocino County.
The Urban Overlay Zone reflects existing residential land use patterns within the urban
environs of the Airport. The Urban Overlay Zone provides a Density exception to the basic
Density criteria provided in Table 3A, Basic Compatibility Criteria, to allow multi-family
residential uses. See Policy 3.2.3(b) for details.
1.3. Scope of ALUC Concerns
1.3.1. Airport Influence Area:
(a) The Influence Area of the Ukiah Municipal Airport encompasses all lands on which the uses
could be significantly affected by current or future aircraft operations at the Airport as
well as lands on which the uses could negatively affect Airport usage and thus necessitate
restriction on those uses.11
(b) In delineating the Airport Influence Area, the geographic extents of four types of
compatibility concerns are considered. The Compatibility Zones depicted in the
Compatibility Policy Map, Map 3A in Chapter 3, consider all four compatibility factors in
a composite manner.
(1) Noise: Locations exposed to potentially disruptive levels of aircraft noise.
(2) Safety: Areas where the risk of an aircraft accident poses heightened safety concerns
for people and property on the ground.
(3) Airspace Protection: Places where height and various other land use characteristics
need to be restricted in order to prevent creation of physical, visual, or electronic
hazards to flight within the airspace required for operation of aircraft to and from
the Airport.
(4) Overflight: Locations beneath where aircraft in flight are distinctly visible and
audible even if not necessarily directly overhead.
1.3.2. Airport Growth Assumptions: The Airport Influence Area for the Airport reflects the existing
configuration of the Airport, planned airfield improvements and projected aircraft activity
covering the requisite 20-year planning horizon.12 Background data in Chapter 4 documents
the aeronautical assumptions upon which this UKIALUCP is based.
11 The basis for delineating the Airport Influence Area is set by state law in Business and Professions Code Section 11010.
12 See Public Utilities Code Section 21675(a).
Page 192 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–8 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
1.3.3. Referral Area: The Airport Influence Area for UKIALUCP constitutes the Referral Area within
which certain Land Use Actions and Airport Actions are subject to ALUC review to determine
consistency with the UKIALUCP. See Section 1.4 for the types of Actions subject to ALUC
review.
1.3.4. Airport Impacts Not Considered: Other impacts sometimes created by airports (e.g. air pollution,
automobile traffic, etc.) are not addressed by these compatibility policies and are not factors
that the ALUC shall consider in reviewing Land Use Actions. Also, in accordance with state
law,13 neither this UKIALUCP nor the ALUC have authority over the operation of the
Airport (including where and when aircraft fly, airport security, and other such matters).
1.4. Types of Actions Subject to ALUC Review
1.4.1. Land Use Actions for which Local Agency Referral to ALUC is Mandatory: Prior to approving the
types of Land Use Actions indicated in Paragraphs (a) and (b), the Local Agency always must
refer the Action to the ALUC for determination of consistency with the UKIALUCP.14
(a) Local Agency adoption or approval of any new general plan or specific plan or any
amendment thereto that affects lands within the Airport Influence Area.
(b) Local Agency adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation, including
any proposed change or variance to any such ordinance or regulation, that (1) affects
land within the Airport Influence Area and (2) may involve the types of airport impact
concerns listed in Policy 1.3.1(b).
1.4.2. Major Land Use Actions for which Local Agency Referral to ALUC is Required on an Interim Basis:
In addition to the above types of Land Use Actions for which referral to the ALUC is always
mandatory, referral of Major Land Use Actions is required until such time as (1) the ALUC
finds that a Local Agency’s general plan or specific plan is consistent with this UKIALUCP
or (2) the Local Agency has Overruled the ALUC’s determination of inconsistency. Only Major
Land Use Actions as listed in Policy 1.4.5 must be referred for review during this interim
period.15
13 Public Utilities Code Section 21674(e).
14 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b).
15 Public Utilities Code Section 21676.5(a) allows an ALUC to require the Local Agency to refer all Land Use Actions, including
regulations and permits, involving land within the Airport Influence Area to it for review until the Local Agency’s general plan
or specific plan is revised or the specific findings are made. Under this policy, the Mendocino County ALUC elects only to require
referral of Major Land Use Actions. The scope or character of certain Major Land Use Actions, as listed in Policy 1.4.5, is such
that their compatibility with Airport activity is a potential concern.
Page 193 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–9
1.4.3. Voluntary Referral of Land Use Actions: A Local Agency may choose to voluntarily refer to the
ALUC or ALUC Secretary for informal review and consultation a Land Use Action involving
a question of compatibility with Airport activities. ALUC or ALUC Secretary review of these
types of Land Use Actions can serve to enhance their compatibility with airport activity.
Because comments from the ALUC are advisory when reviewing Land Use Actions referred
voluntarily, Local Agencies are not required to adhere to the ALUC’s review period or Overrule
process if they elect to approve such actions without incorporating design changes or
conditions recommended by the ALUC. 16
1.4.4. Airport Development Actions for which Referral to ALUC is Mandatory: Under state law, planning
and development actions involving airport property are subject to ALUC review as follows:
(a) Prior to approving either of the following types of Airport planning and development
actions, the City of Ukiah must refer the proposed Airport Development Action to the
ALUC for determination of consistency with the UKIALUCP.
(1) Adoption or modification of the master plan for the Airport.17
(2) Any proposal for “expansion” of the Airport if such expansion will require an
amended Airport Permit from the State of California.18
(b) Nonaviation development of Airport property is not deemed to be a form of airport
operations. Consequently, such proposals are considered Land Use Actions and are
subject to ALUC review just as is required for nonaviation Land Use Actions off Airport
property. The review may take place as part of an airport master plan or on an individual
development Project basis.
1.4.5. Major Land Use Actions: Referral of the following types of Land Use Actions is required
under the conditions indicated in Policy 1.4.2 and is encouraged on a voluntary basis in
accordance with Policy 1.4.3.
(a) Any proposal for nonaviation structures or uses of land within Compatibility Zone 1 (see
Policy 1.2.12 for definition of an Aviation-Related Use).
(b) Any of the following types of Land Use Actions affecting land within Compatibility Zones 2
through 6.
(1) Proposed expansion of the sphere of influence of a city or special district.
(2) Proposed pre-zoning associated with future annexation of land to a city.
(3) Proposed infrastructure or other capital improvements (e.g., water, sewer, or roads)
not reflected in a previously reviewed general plan or specific plan that would
promote urban uses in undeveloped or agricultural areas.
16 Once a Local Agency either makes its general plan, specific plans, zoning ordinance or facilities master plan consistent with
the UKIALUCP or Overrules the ALUC as provided by law, the ALUC no longer has authority under state law to require that
all actions, regulations, and permits be referred for review. However, a Local Agency may choose to voluntarily refer Land Use
Actions, as listed in Policy 1.4.5, to the ALUC for informal review and comment. ALUC review of these types of Actions can
serve to enhance their compatibility with Airport activity.
17 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(c)
18 Public Utilities Code Section 21664.5 defines “airport expansion” as being “construction of a new runway,” “extension or
realignment of an existing runway,” “acquisition of clear zones [runway protection zones] or of any interest in land for the
purpose of [either of the above],” or “any other expansion of the airport’s physical facilities for the purpose of accomplishing
or which are related to the purpose of [any of the above].”
Page 194 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–10 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(4) Proposed development agreements or amendments to such agreements.
(5) Proposed residential Land Use Actions, including land divisions, consisting of six or
more dwelling units or parcels.
(6) Proposed nonresidential Land Use Actions having a building floor area of 10,000
square feet or greater.
(7) Proposed Land Use Actions regularly attracting more than 100 people (including
employees, customers/visitors) to outdoor activities on the Project site (e.g., flea
markets).
(8) Proposed land acquisition by a Local Agency for any building intended to
accommodate the public (for example, a school, jail, or hospital).
(9) Proposed Redevelopment (see Policy 1.2.35) if the Project is of a type listed in
Paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(8) of this policy.19
(c) Actions affecting land uses within any portion of the Airport Influence Area:
(1) Proposed structures or objects having a height of more than 35 feet within the
Airspace High Terrain Zone.
(2) Proposed objects (including buildings, antennas, and other structures) that receive
an Aeronautical Study determination of anything other than “not a hazard to air
navigation” by the Federal Aviation Administration in accordance with 14 CFR Part
77 (See Appendix B).
(3) Proposed Projects (e.g., water treatment facilities, waste transfer or disposal facilities,
parks with open water areas) or plan (e.g., Habitat Conservation Plan) having the
potential to cause an increase in the attraction of birds or other wildlife that can be
hazardous to aircraft operations in FAA-defined locations.20
(4) Projects having the potential to create electrical or visual hazards to aircraft in flight,
including (see Policy 3.6.4(b)):
▪ Electrical interference with aircraft radio communications or navigational
signals;
▪ Lighting which could be mistaken for Airport lighting;
▪ Glare (such as from mirrored or other highly reflective structures or building
features) or bright lights (such as from search lights and laser light displays) in
the eyes of pilots of aircraft using the Airport; and
19 ALUC review of Redevelopment under this policy includes Redevelopment of a property for which the Existing Land Use is
consistent with the general plan and/or specific plan, but Nonconforming with the compatibility criteria set forth in this
UKIALUCP. This policy is intended to address circumstances that arise when a general pl an or specific plan land use desig-
nation does not conform to UKIALUCP compatibility criteria but is deemed consistent with the UKIALUCP because the
designation reflects an Existing Land Use. Proposed Redevelopment of such lands voids the consistency status and is to be treated
as a new Land Use Action subject to ALUC review even if the proposed use is consistent with the local general plan or specific
plan. (Also see Policies 3.3.1 and 3.3.4.)
20 FAA rules and regulations defining these locations are found in: Public Law 106-181 (Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment
and Reform Act for the 21st Century, known as AIR 21), Section 503; 40 CFR 258, Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills,
Section 258.10, Airport Safety; Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports; Advisory
Circular 150/5200-34A, Construction or Establishment of Landfills near Public Airports; and any subsequent applicable FAA guid-
ance.
Page 195 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–11
▪ Other uses near the Airport that may impair a pilot’s visibility (such as from
sources of dust, steam, or smoke) or cause thermal plumes or other forms of
unstable air.
(5) Projects having the potential to create a thermal plume extending to an altitude where
aircraft fly.
(d) Proposed nonaviation development of Airport property if such development has not
previously been included in the airport master plan or City of Ukiah general plan
reviewed by the ALUC. (See Policy 1.2.12 for definition of Aviation-Related Use.)
(e) Any other proposed Land Use Action or Airport Development Action, as determined by the
Local Agency, involving a question of compatibility with Airport activities may also be
referred on a voluntary basis.
1.5. Limitations of the ALUC and UKIALUCP
1.5.1. Airport Operations: Except as indicated in Policy 1.4.4, neither the ALUC nor this
UKIALUCP have authority over the planning and design of facilities on the Airport or over
Airport operations, including where and when aircraft fly, the types of aircraft flown, and
other aspects of aviation.21
1.5.2. Federal, State, and Tribal Entities: Lands controlled (i.e., owned, leased, or in trust) by federal
or state agencies or by Native American tribes are not subject to the provisions of the state
ALUC statutes or this UKIALUCP. However, the compatibility criteria included herein are
intended as recommendations to these agencies.
1.5.3. Existing Land Uses: The policies of this UKIALUCP do not apply to Existing Land Uses.22 A
land use is considered to be “existing” when one or more of the conditions below has been
met prior to the effective date (see Policy 1.1.7) of this UKIALUCP.
(a) Qualifying Criteria: An Existing Land Use is one that either physically exists or for which
Local Agency commitments to the proposal have been obtained; that is, no further
discretionary approvals are necessary. Local Agency commitment to a proposal can usually
be considered firm once one or more of the following have occurred:
(1) A tentative parcel or subdivision map has been approved and not expired;
(2) A vesting tentative parcel or subdivision map has been approved and not expired;
(3) A development agreement has been approved and not expired;
(4) A final subdivision map has been recorded and not expired;
(5) A use permit or other discretionary entitlement has been approved and not expired;
or
(6) A valid building permit has been issued.
(b) Expiration of Local Agency Commitment: If a Local Agency’s commitment to a proposed
Project, as set forth in Paragraph (a)(1) through (5) of this policy, expires, the Project will
21 This is an explicit limitation of state law under Public Utilities Code Section 21674(e).
22 This is an explicit limitation of Public Utilities Code Sections 21670(a) and 21674(a).
Page 196 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–12 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
no longer qualify as an Existing Land Use. As such, the Project shall be subject to the
policies of this UKIALUCP.
(c) Revisions to an Approved Project: Filing of a new version of any of the approval
documents listed in Paragraph (a) of this policy means that the use no longer qualifies
as an Existing Land Use and, therefore, is subject to ALUC review in accordance with
the policies of Section 1.4.
(d) Existing Nonconforming Uses: The ALUC has no ability to reduce or remove
Nonconforming or otherwise incompatible Existing Land Uses from the Airport environs.
Further, this UKIALUCP is not intended to compel Local Agency action to reduce or
remove Nonconforming or otherwise incompatible Existing Land Uses from the Airport
environs. Proposed changes to uses within existing structures are not subject to ALUC
review unless the changes would result in an increased nonconformity with the
compatibility criteria (see Policy 3.3.1) and requires discretionary approval on the part
of the Local Agency (e.g., proposal for an indoor sport facility or place of worship within
an existing industrial building). Proposed Redevelopment (see definition in Policy 1.2.35)
is, however, subject to ALUC review and conformance with the compatibility criteria
the same as new development.
1.5.4. Development by Right: Nothing in this UKIALUCP prohibits:
(a) Construction of a single-family home on a legal lot of record as of the effective date (see
Policy 1.1.7) of this UKIALUCP provided that the home is not within Compatibility Zone
1 and the use is permitted by the Local Agency’s land use regulations.
(b) Construction of accessory dwelling unit(s) as defined by state law and local regulations.23
Accessory dwelling units shall not be considered in calculation of residential Density for
a proposed Land Use Action under Policy 3.2.5.
(c) Construction of multi-family housing when dictated by state law and provided that the
Local Agency’s general plan and/or zoning ordinance have been found consistent with
this UKIALUCP.
(d) Lot line adjustments provided that new developable parcels would not be created and
the resulting Density or Intensity of the affected property would not exceed the applicable
criteria indicated in Table 3A, Basic Compatibility Criteria.
(e) Construction or establishment of a family day care home serving 14 or fewer children24
either in an existing dwelling or in a new dwelling permitted by the policies of this
UKIALUCP.
23 Government Code, Section 65852.2.
24 Health and Safety Code, Section 1596.78.
Page 197 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–13
ALUC R EVIEW P ROCESS
2.1. General
2.1.1. Timing of Referral: The precise timing of the ALUC’s or ALUC Secretary’s review of a
proposed Land Use Action or Airport Development Action may vary depending upon the nature
of the specific action.
(a) Referrals to the ALUC should be made at the earliest reasonable point in time so that
the ALUC’s review can be duly considered by the Local Agency prior to when the agency
formally approves the Action. Depending upon the type of Action and the normal
scheduling of meetings, ALUC review can be completed before, after, or concurrently
with review by the local planning commission and other advisory bodies but must be
accomplished before final approval by the Local Agency.
(b) Completion of a formal application with the Local Agency is not required prior to a Local
Agency’s referral of a proposed Land Use Action or Airport Development Action to the
ALUC.
(1) Rather, a Project applicant may request, and the Local Agency may refer, a proposed
Action to the ALUC for early consistency determination, so long as the Local Agency
or Project applicant is able to provide the ALUC with the required submittal
information for the proposed Action, as specified in Policies 2.2.4, 2.3.1, and 2.4.1.
(2) A Project applicant may also seek informal ALUC comment on a prospective Land
Use Action at an early design stage prior to formal referral to the ALUC for a
consistency determination.
2.1.2. Submittal of Environmental Documents: The ALUC does not have a formal responsibility to
review the environmental document associated with Land Use Actions or Airport Development
Actions referred to it for review.
(a) However, if an environmental document has been prepared at the time that the Land
Use Action or Airport Development Action is referred for review and the document contains
information pertinent to the review and not included in other applicable submittal
information as listed in Policies 2.2.4, 2.3.1, and/or 2.4.1, then a copy should be included
with the referral for reference.
(b) The ALUC authorizes the ALUC Secretary, after consultation with the ALUC
Chairman, to provide comments on environmental documents submitted to the ALUC
for comment under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
separately from referral of a Land Use Action for a consistency determination. ALUC
and/or ALUC Secretary comments, if any, shall be provided to the referring Local Agency
within the timeframe established for receipt of comments from other entities.
2.1.3. Responsibilities for Ensuring Project Compliance with the UKIALUCP: The ALUC, Local Agencies,
and Project applicants each have responsibilities for ensuring that proposed Land Use Actions
and Airport Development Actions comply with the compatibility criteria set forth in this
UKIALUCP. These responsibilities vary depending upon whether a Local Agency’s general
plan and applicable specific plan(s) have been determined by the ALUC to be consistent
with the UKIALUCP.
(a) Prior to the Local Agency plans becoming consistent with the UKIALUCP, the ALUC
has the lead role in analyzing and ensuring Project compliance with the policies herein.
Page 198 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–14 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(1) Local Agency staff may choose to initially evaluate proposed Land Use Actions and
work with the Project applicant to bring the proposal into compliance with
UKIALUCP criteria. Local Agency staff should also encourage Project applicants to
contact the ALUC Secretary for details about UKIALUCP policies and the policies’
applicability to the proposed Project. The ALUC Secretary will provide informal input
at this stage if requested.
(2) When a proposed Land Use Action or Airport Development Action is of a type that
requires a formal consistency determination by the ALUC (those listed in Policies
1.4.1, 1.4.2, and 1.4.4), the Local Agency is responsible for referring that Action to the
ALUC. The Project applicant is responsible for providing the information about the
Project that the ALUC requires to conduct its review and for paying applicable
ALUC fees. The ALUC Secretary shall review the proposal to evaluate its
compliance with the UKIALUCP policies in accordance with Policy 2.2.5 or 2.3.2
and place the Project and review on the ALUC agenda for a consistency decision
within the applicable timeframe established by Policy 2.2.7, 2.3.4, or 2.4.3.
(b) Subsequent to when a Local Agency’s general plan and applicable specific plan(s) have
been determined by the ALUC to be consistent with the UKIALUCP, the Local Agency
and its staff are responsible for ensuring that proposed Major Land Use Actions comply
with UKIALUCP criteria.
(1) The ALUC Secretary will provide informal input if requested and can refer the
proposed Action to the ALUC for additional comment if desired by the Local Agency
and/or the Project applicant.
(2) Land Use Actions and Airport Development Actions for which referral to the ALUC is
mandatory, regardless of the general plan and specific plan consistency status, must
continue to be referred for a formal consistency determination by the ALUC.
(c) In either case, Project applicants are responsible for designing their Projects to comply with
UKIALUCP policies.
(d) Once a Project has been found consistent with the UKIALUCP, the Local Agency and its
staff are responsible for enforcing UKIALUCP criteria as they apply to a Project such
that the Project continues to comply with UKIALUCP criteria on an on-going basis
following completion of the Project (e.g., usage Intensity and height limitations).
2.1.4. Public Input: Where applicable, the ALUC shall provide public notice and obtain public input
before making a consistency determination regarding any proposed Land Use Action or
Airport Development Action under consideration.25
2.1.5. Fees: Any applicable review fees as established by the ALUC shall accompany the referral
of Actions for ALUC or ALUC Secretary review.26
2.2. Review Process for General Plans, Specific Plans, Zoning Ordinances, and Building
Regulations
2.2.1. Initial ALUC Review of General Plan Consistency: In conjunction with adoption or amendment
of this UKIALUCP, the ALUC shall review the general plans and specific plan(s) of affected
25 Public Utilities Code Section 21675.2(d) and Government Code Section 54950 (Brown Act).
26 Public Utilities Code Section21671.5(f) allows for ALUCs to charge fees for project reviews.
Page 199 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–15
Local Agencies to determine their consistency with the ALUC’s policies. Inconsistencies, if
any, shall be identified.
(a) State law requires that within 180 days of the ALUC’s adoption or amendment of this
UKIALUCP, each Local Agency having territory within the Airport Influence Area of the
Airport must amend its general plan and any applicable specific plan(s) to be consistent
with the ALUC’s UKIALUCP27 or, alternatively, provide required notice, adopt
findings, and Overrule the ALUC in accordance with statutory requirements.28 It is the
ALUC’s policy to deem the 180-day period to begin as of the date that digital copies of
the adopted UKIALUCP are made available to the affected Local Agencies.
(b) Prior to approving a proposed amendment of a general plan or specific plan as
necessitated by Paragraph (a) of this policy, the Local Agency must submit a draft of the
proposal to the ALUC for review and approval.
2.2.2. Subsequent Proposed Amendment of Current or Adoption of New General Plans, Specific Plans, Zoning
Ordinances, or Building Regulations: Adoption of a Local Agency’s new general plan, specific plan,
zoning ordinance or building regulation, or amendment of a current such plan, ordinance,
or regulation, requires review by the ALUC if the plan, ordinance, or regulation:
(a) Has general applicability throughout the community; and/or
(b) Concerns land within the Airport Influence Area.
2.2.3. Identification of Infill Areas: If a Local Agency wishes to have its general plan show locations for
Infill development as indicated in Policy 3.3.45, the Local Agency must provide the ALUC a
map along with supporting documentation identifying areas it requests the ALUC to
consider as Infill. This may be done in conjunction with its referral of a general plan or
specific plan amendment to the ALUC in response to the requirements of Policy 2.2.1 or
as part of a later update in accordance with Policy 2.2.2. The ALUC shall include a
determination on the Infill locations as part of its consistency determination regarding the
general plan and/or applicable specific plan(s).
2.2.4. Required Submittal Information: Copies of the complete text and maps of the plan, ordinance,
or regulation proposed for adoption or amendment shall be submitted to the ALUC. Any
supporting material, such as environmental documents, assessing the proposal’s consistency
with the UKIALUCP should be included. If the amendment is required as part of a
proposed Major Land Use Action, then the information listed in Policy 2.3.1 shall also be
included to the extent applicable.
2.2.5. ALUC Secretary’s Responsibilities: The ALUC Secretary shall review the proposed general plan,
specific plan, zoning ordinance, or building regulation for compliance with the UKIALUCP
and forward the analysis to the ALUC for a formal consistency determination. The ALUC
Secretary does not have authority to make formal consistency determinations.
2.2.6. ALUC Action Choices: When reviewing a general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, or
building regulation for consistency with the UKIALUCP, the ALUC has three options:
(a) Find the plan, ordinance, or regulation consistent with the UKIALUCP. To make such
a finding with regard to a general plan, the conditions identified in Section 3.1 must be
met.
27 Government Code Section 65302.3.
28 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b).
Page 200 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–16 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(b) Find the plan, ordinance, or regulation consistent with the UKIALUCP, subject to
conditions and/or modifications that the ALUC may require. Any such conditions
should be limited in scope and described in a manner that allows compliance to be
clearly assessed.
(c) Find the plan, ordinance, or regulation inconsistent with the UKIALUCP. In making a
finding of inconsistency, the ALUC shall note the specific conflicts or shortcomings
upon which its determination is based.
2.2.7. Response Time: The ALUC must respond to a Local Agency’s request for a consistency
determination on a general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, or building regulation
within 60 days from the date of referral.29
(a) The date of referral is deemed to be the date on which all applicable information as
specified in Policy 2.2.3 and indicated on the ALUC Review Application (Appendix E) is
received by the ALUC Secretary and applicable referral fees have been paid.
(b) If additional information is required, the ALUC Secretary shall notify the City of Ukiah
within 14 calendar days of the date of receiving the referral.
(c) If the ALUC fails to make a determination within the 60-day period, the proposed Land
Use Action shall be deemed consistent with the UKIALUCP.
(d) The 60-day review period may be extended if the referring Local Agency or Project
applicant agrees in writing or so states at an ALUC public hearing on the Land Use
Action.
(e) Regardless of ALUC action or failure to act, the proposed Land Use Action must comply
with other applicable local, state, and federal regulations and laws.
(f) The referring Local Agency shall be notified of the ALUC’s determination in writing.
2.3. Review Process for Major Land Use Actions
2.3.1. Required Submittal Information: A proposed Major Land Use Action referred for ALUC review
and formal consistency determination shall include the following information to the extent
applicable:
(a) A completed ALUC Review Application as provided in Appendix E of this
UKIALUCP.
(b) Property location data (assessor’s parcel number, street address, subdivision lot
number).
(c) An accurately scaled map depicting the Project site location in relationship to the Airport
boundary and runway.
(d) A description of the proposed use(s), current general plan and zoning designations, and
the type of approval being sought from the Local Agency (e.g., zoning variance, use
permit, building permit).
(e) A detailed site plan and supporting data showing: site boundaries and size; existing uses
that will remain; location of existing and proposed structures, open spaces, and water
29 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(d).
Page 201 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–17
bodies; ground elevations (above mean sea level); and elevations of tops of structures
and trees. Additionally:
(1) For residential uses, an indication of the potential or proposed number of dwelling
units per acre (excluding any accessory dwelling units as defined by state law and
local regulations).30
(2) For nonresidential uses, the total floor area for each type of proposed use, the
number of auto parking spaces, and, if known, the maximum number of people
(employees, visitors/customers) potentially occupying the total site or portions
thereof at any one time.
(f) Identification of any features, during or following construction, that would increase the
attraction of birds or cause other wildlife hazards to aircraft operations at the Airport or
in its environs (see Policy 3.6.4). Such features include, but are not limited to, the
following:
(1) Open water areas.
(2) Sediment ponds, retention basins.
(3) Detention basins that hold water for more than 48 hours.
(4) Artificial wetlands.
(g) Identification of any characteristics that could create electrical interference, confusing
or bright lights, glare, smoke, or other electrical or visual hazards to aircraft flight.
(h) Any environmental document (initial study, draft environmental impact report, etc.) that
may have been prepared for the Project if it contains information pertinent to a
determination of the Project’s consistency with UKIALUCP criteria (see Policy 2.1.2).
(i) Staff reports regarding the Project.
2.3.2. ALUC Secretary Responsibilities: When a Major Land Use Action is referred to the ALUC, the
ALUC Secretary shall analyze the Action to evaluate whether significant compatibility issues
are evident and do one of the following:
(a) If referral of the Action is mandatory, forward the Action and the analysis of it to the
ALUC for a formal consistency determination within the timeframe established under
Policy 2.3.4.
(b) If referral of the Action is voluntary, but the ALUC Secretary’s analysis finds evident
conflicts with the UKIALUCP, forward the Action and the analysis to the ALUC for
comment. The ALUC’s comments shall be provided in writing to the referring Local
Agency within the timeframe set by the Local Agency.
(c) If referral of the Action is voluntary and the Action has no apparent conflicts with the
UKIALUCP criteria, the ALUC authorizes the ALUC Secretary to notify the applicant
of this conclusion and that forwarding the Action to the ALUC for comment or a
consistency determination will not be required. The Secretary shall provide the ALUC,
at its next regular meeting, a list of all Actions referred but not requiring forwarding to
the ALUC.
2.3.3. ALUC Action Choices:
30 Government Code, Section 65852.2.
Page 202 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–18 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(a) Regarding Major Land Use Actions for which referral is mandatory in accordance with
Policy 1.4.2, the ALUC has three choices of action when making a consistency
determination:
(1) Find the Major Land Use Action consistent with the UKIALUCP.
(2) Find the Major Land Use Action consistent with the UKIALUCP, subject to
compliance with such conditions as the ALUC may specify. Any such conditions
should be limited in scope and described in a manner that allows compliance to be
clearly assessed (e.g., the height of a structure).
(3) Find the Major Land Use Action inconsistent with the UKIALUCP. In making a
finding of inconsistency, the ALUC shall note the specific conflicts upon which
the determination is based.
(b) Regarding Major Land Use Actions for which referral is voluntary in accordance with
Policy 1.4.3, the ALUC review and comments are advisory. However, the Local Agency
should include any such comments in its official record of the final decision on the
Action.
2.3.4. Response Time: In responding to Major Land Use Actions referred for review, the policy of the
ALUC is that:
(a) When a Major Land Use Action is referred for review on a mandatory basis as required by
Policy 1.4.2:
(1) The date of referral is deemed to be the date on which all applicable information
as specified in Policy 2.3.1 and indicated on the ALUC Review Application
(Appendix E) is received by the ALUC Secretary and applicable referral fees have
been paid.
(2) If additional information is required, the ALUC Secretary shall notify the Local
Agency within 14 calendar days of the date of receiving the referral.
(3) Reviews of Major Land Use Actions forwarded to the ALUC for a consistency
determination shall be completed within 60 days of the date of the referral.
(4) If the ALUC fails to make a determination within the above time periods, the
proposed Major Land Use Action shall be deemed consistent with the UKIALUCP.
(b) When a Major Land Use Action is referred on a voluntary basis in accordance with Policy
1.4.3, review by the ALUC Secretary and/or the ALUC should be completed in a timely
manner enabling the comments to be considered by decision-making bodies of the
referring Local Agency.
(c) Regardless of action or failure to act on the part of the ALUC Secretary or the ALUC,
the proposed Major Land Use Action must comply with other applicable local, state, and
federal laws and regulations.
2.3.5. Subsequent Reviews of Related Major Land Use Actions: Once a Major Land Use Action for which
referral to the ALUC was mandatory has been found consistent with the UKIALUCP, it
generally need not be referred for review at subsequent stages of the planning process (e.g.,
for a use permit after a zoning change has been reviewed). However, additional ALUC
review is required if any of the following are true:
(a) At the time of the original ALUC review, the available information on the proposed
Major Land Use Action was only sufficient to determine consistency with compatibility
Page 203 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–19
criteria at a planning level of detail, not at a Project design level. For example, the
proposed land use designation indicated in a general plan, specific plan, or zoning
amendment may have been found consistent, but information on site layout, maximum
Intensity limits, building heights, and other such factors that may also affect the
consistency determination for a Project may not have yet been known.
(b) The design of the Project subsequently changes in a manner that affects previously
considered compatibility issues and could raise questions as to the validity of the earlier
finding of consistency. Proposed changes warranting a new review include, but are not
limited to, the following:
(1) For residential uses, any increase in the number of dwelling units to a level
exceeding the criteria set forth in this UKIALUCP unless the increase is a
development by right;
(2) For nonresidential uses, a change in the types of proposed uses, any increase in the
total floor area, and/or a change in the allocation of floor area among different
types of uses in a manner that could result in an increase in the Intensity of use (more
people on the site) to a level exceeding the criteria set forth in this UKIALUCP;
(3) Any increase in the height of structures or other design features such that the height
limits established herein would be exceeded or exceeded by a greater amount;
(4) Major site design changes (such as incorporation of clustering or modifications to
the configuration of open land areas proposed for the site) if site design was a factor
in the initial review of the Project;
(5) Any significant change to a proposed Project for which a special exception was
granted in accordance with Policy 3.8.2;
(6) Any new design features that would create visual hazards (e.g., certain types of
lights, sources of glare, and sources of dust, steam, or smoke);
(7) Any new equipment or features that would create electronic hazards or cause
interference with aircraft communications or navigation; and/or
(8) Addition of features that could attract wildlife that is potentially haza rdous to
aircraft operations.
(c) At the time of original ALUC review, conditions were placed on the Major Land Use
Action that require subsequent ALUC review.
(d) The Local Agency requests further ALUC review.
2.4. Review Process for Airport Development Actions
2.4.1. Required Submittal Information for Airport Development Actions: An airport master plan or other
development plan31 for Ukiah Municipal Airport referred to the ALUC for review in
accordance with Policy 1.4.4 shall contain sufficient information to enable the ALUC to
adequately assess the noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight impacts of the
facility’s activity upon surrounding land uses.
31 As defined by Public Utilities Code Section 21664.5(b).
Page 204 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–20 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(a) When a new or amended master plan is the subject of the ALUC review, the noise,
safety, airspace protection, and overflight impacts should be addressed in the plan report
and/or in an accompanying environmental document. Proposed changes in Airport
facilities and usage that could have land use compatibility implications should be noted.
(b) For other Airport Development Actions, the relationship to a previously adopted master
plan or other approved plan for the Airport should be indicated—specifically, whether
the proposed development implements an adopted/approved plan or represents an
addition or change to any such previous plan. Any environmental document prepared
for the Airport Development Action should be included in the submittal.
(c) For either airport master plans or other airport development plans, the following
specific information should be included to the extent applicable:
(1) A layout plan drawing of the proposed facility or improvements showing the
location of:
▪ Property boundaries;
▪ Runways or helicopter takeoff and landing areas;
▪ Runway or helipad protection zones; and
▪ Aircraft or helicopter approach/departure flight routes.
(2) A revised map of the Airspace Protection Surfaces as defined by 14 CFR Part 77 if the
proposal would result in changes to these surfaces. A map reflecting the current
and future configurations of the Airspace Protection Surfaces for the Airport is included
as Map 3B, Airspace Protection Zones, in Chapter 3.
(3) Updated activity forecasts, including the number of operations by each type of
aircraft proposed to use the facility, the percentage of day versus night operations,
and the distribution of takeoffs and landings for each runway direction. The effects
of the proposed development on the forecast Airport usage indicated in Chapter 4
of this UKIALUCP should be described.
(4) Proposed flight track locations and projected noise contours. Differences from the
flight track data and noise contours presented in Chapter 4 of this UKIALUCP
should be described.
(5) A map showing existing and planned land uses in the areas affected by aircraft
activity associated with implementation of the proposed master plan or other
development plan.
(6) Any environmental document (initial study, draft environmental impact report,
etc.) that may have been prepared for the plan.
(7) Identification and proposed mitigation of impacts on surrounding land uses to the
extent that those impacts would be greater than indicated by the compatibility
factors depicted in the Airport exhibits presented in Chapter 4.
2.4.2. ALUC Action Choices for Ukiah Municipal Airport Plans: When reviewing a proposed new or
revised airport master plan or new development plans for the Airport, the ALUC has three
options (see Section 3.9 for policies pertaining to the substance of the ALUC review of
plans for the Airport):
(a) Find the Airport plan consistent with the UKIALUCP.
Page 205 of 550
PROCEDURAL POLICIES CHAPTER 2
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 2–21
(b) Find the Airport plan consistent with the UKIALUCP with the condition that the
UKIALUCP will be modified to reflect the assumptions and proposals of the Airport
plan.
(c) Find the Airport plan inconsistent with the UKIALUCP. In making a finding of
inconsistency, the ALUC shall note the specific conflicts upon which the determination
is based.
2.4.3. Response Time: The ALUC must respond to the referral of an airport master plan or other
development plan within 60 days from the date of referral.32
(a) The date of referral is deemed to be the date on which all applicable information as
specified in Policy 2.4.1 is received by the ALUC Secretary and applicable referral fees
have been paid.
(b) If additional information is required, the ALUC Secretary shall notify the City of Ukiah
within 14 calendar days of the date of receiving the referral.
(c) If the ALUC fails to make a determination within the specified period, the proposed
Airport Development Action shall be deemed consistent with the UKIALUCP.
(d) Regardless of ALUC action or failure to act, the proposed Airport Development Action
must comply with other applicable local, state, and federal regulations and laws.
(e) The City of Ukiah shall be notified of the ALUC’s action in writing.
2.5. Process for Overruling the ALUC
2.5.1. ALUC Determination of “Inconsistent”: If the ALUC determines that a proposed Land Use
Action or Airport Development Action is inconsistent with this UKIALUCP, the ALUC must
notify the Local Agency and shall indicate the reasons for the inconsistency determination.
2.5.2. Overruling of ALUC by Local Agency:
(a) If a Local Agency wishes to proceed with a proposed Land Use Action or Airport Development
Action that the ALUC has determined to be inconsistent with the UKIALUCP, or if the
Local Agency wishes to ignore a condition for consistency, the Local Agency must Overrule
the ALUC determination in accordance with the provisions of state law.33
(b) The overruling process applies only to formal consistency determinations made by the
ALUC on Land Use Actions or Airport Development Actions for which referral to the ALUC
is mandatory.
(c) Because ALUC review of Land Use Actions referred on a voluntary basis in accordance
with Policy 1.4.3 do not represent formal consistency determinations, as is the case with
Actions referred under Policies 1.4.1 or 1.4.2, Local Agencies are not required to adhere to
the Overruling process if they elect to approve the Project without incorporating design
changes or conditions recommended by the ALUC. Similarly, the Overruling process
32 Public Utilities Code Section 21676(d).
33 See Public Utilities Code Section 21670(a), 21676 and 21676.5 for specific procedures for overruling the ALUC. Further
guidance is provided in the California Airport Land Use Handbook published by the California Division of Aeronautics (see
beginning on page 5-15 of the 2011 edition). Chapter 1 of this UKIALUCP also summarizes the overrule process to be
followed by a Local Agency.
Page 206 of 550
CHAPTER 2 PROCEDURAL POLICIES
2–22 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
does not apply to any comments by the ALUC Secretary in conjunction with policy
compliance assessment done under Policy 2.3.2(b).
2.5.3. ALUC Comments on Proposed Overruling: The ALUC should provide comments on the
proposed Overruling decision so that it is part of the Local Agency’s record of decision. If the
ALUC chooses to comment, it must do so within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision
and findings.34
34 Public Utilities Code Sections 21676(a), (b), and (c) and 21676.5(a).
Page 207 of 550
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
CHAPTER 3
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Page 208 of 550
Page 209 of 550
3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–1
Compatibility Policies
C OMPATIBILITY C RITERIA FOR L AND U SE A CTIONS
3.1. Evaluating General Plans, Specific Plans, Zoning Ordinances, and Building Regulations
3.1.1. Statutory Requirement: State law requires each Local Agency having territory within an Airport
Influence Area to modify its general plan and any applicable specific plan to be consistent with
the airport land use compatibility plan for the particular airport unless it takes the steps
required to Overrule the ALUC. In order for a general plan to be considered consistent with
this UKIALUCP, the following must be accomplished:35
3.1.2. Elimination of Conflicts: No direct conflicts can exist between the two plans.
(a) Direct conflicts primarily involve general plan land use designations that do not meet
the Density or Intensity criteria specified in Table 3A, Basic Compatibility. In addition,
conflicts with regard to other policies—height limitations in particular—may exist.
(1) However, a general plan cannot be found inconsistent with the UKIALUCP
because of land use designations that reflect Existing Land Uses even if those
designations conflict with the compatibility criteria of this UKIALUCP. General
plan land use designations that merely echo the Existing Land Uses are exempt from
requirements for general plan consistency with the UKIALUCP.36
(2) On the other hand, proposed Redevelopment or other changes to Existing Land Uses
are not exempt from compliance with this UKIALUCP and are subject to ALUC
review in accordance with Policies 1.5.3(d) and 1.4.5(b)(9). To ensure that
Nonconforming Uses do not become more nonconforming, general plans or
implementing documents must include policies setting limitations on expansion
and Reconstruction of Nonconforming Uses located within the Airport Influence Area
consistent with Policies 3.3.1 and 3.3.4.
35 See Chapter 1 and Appendix F for additional guidance.
36 This exemption derives from state law which proscribes ALUC authority over Existing Land Uses.
Page 210 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(b) To be consistent with the UKIALUCP, a general plan and/or implementing ordinance
also must include provisions ensuring long-term compliance with the compatibility
criteria. For example, future reuse of a building must not result in a usage Intensity that
exceeds the applicable standard or other limit approved by the ALUC (see Policy 3.5.4).
3.1.3. Establishment of Review Process: Local Agencies must define the process they will follow when
reviewing proposed Projects within the Airport Influence Area to ensure that Projects will be
consistent with the policies set forth in this UKIALUCP.
(a) The process established must ensure that the proposed Project is consistent with the land
use or zoning designation indicated in the Local Agency’s general plan, specific plan,
zoning ordinance, and/or other development regulations that the ALUC has previously
found consistent with this UKIALUCP and that the Project’s subsequent use or reuse
will remain consistent with the policies herein over time. Additionally, consistency with
other applicable compatibility criteria—e.g., usage Intensity, height limitations, Avigation
Easement dedication—must be assessed.
(b) Local Agencies have the following choices for satisfying this review process requirement:
(1) Sufficient detail can be included in the general plan or specific plan(s), referenced
implementing ordinances and regulations, and/or internal Project review procedures
to enable the Local Agency to assess whether a proposed Project fully meets the
compatibility criteria specified in this UKIALUCP (this means both that the
compatibility criteria be identified and that Project review procedures be described);
(2) The UKIALUCP can be adopted by reference (in this case, the Project review
procedure must be described in a separate policy document or memorandum of
understanding presented to and approved by the ALUC); and/or
(3) The general plan can indicate that all Land Use Actions, or a list of Land Use Action
types agreed to by the ALUC, shall be submitted to the ALUC for review in
accordance with the policies of Section 1.4.
3.1.4. Land Use Conversion: The compatibility of uses in the Airport Influence Area shall be preserved
to the maximum feasible extent. Particular emphasis should be placed on preservation of
existing agricultural and open space uses.
(a) The conversion of land from existing or planned agricultural use to residential uses
within Compatibility Zones 1 through 5 is strongly discouraged.
(b) In Compatibility Zone 2, general plan amendments (as well as other discretionary actions
such as rezoning, subdivision approvals, use permits, etc.) that would convert land to
residential use or increase the density of residential uses should be subject to careful
consideration of overflight impacts.
3.2. Evaluating Proposed Land Use Projects
3.2.1. Basis for Determining Project Consistency with UKIALUCP: The determination of consistency
between Projects proposed for locations with the Ukiah Municipal Airport Influence Area and
the policies of this UKIALUCP shall be based upon:
(a) The compatibility criteria set forth in the Basic Compatibility Criteria table (Table 3A), as
described in Policy 3.2.2.
(b) The Compatibility Policy Map for the Ukiah Municipal Airport (Map 3A).
Page 211 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–3
(c) The Airspace Protection Zones provided for Ukiah Municipal Airport (Map 3B).
(d) The criteria for special circumstances set forth in Section 3.3.
(e) The supporting compatibility criteria for individual compatibility factors when necessary
in accordance with Policy 3.2.4.
3.2.2. Basic Land Use Compatibility Criteria: The compatibility evaluations presented in Table 3A
serve as the primary tool for determining whether a proposed Project is to be judged
consistent with the UKIALUCP.
(a) Table 3A lists general land use categories and indicates each use as being either
“Normally Compatible,” “Conditional,” or “Incompatible” depending upon the
Compatibility Zone or Zones in which it is located. The individual evaluations in the cells
of the table are based upon the Density, Intensity, and Open Land criteria shown in the
table header, and the ability of a typical Project in a particular land use category to meet
all criteria. The evaluation terms are defined to mean the following:
(1) “Normally Compatible” means that normal examples of the land use are presumed
to comply with the noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight criteria set forth
in this Chapter. Atypical or complex Projects with this determination may
nevertheless require more detailed evaluation using the criteria for special
circumstances outlined in Section 3.3 and the specific noise, safety, airspace
protection, and overflight compatibility policies set forth in Sections 3.4 through
3.7.
(2) “Conditional” means that the proposed land use is compatible if the indicated usage
Intensity, open land, and other listed conditions are met. Complex Projects with this
determination may nevertheless require more detailed evaluation using the criteria
for special circumstances outlined in Section 3.3 and the specific noise, safety,
airspace protection, and overflight compatibility policies set forth in Sections 3.4
through 3.7. For the purposes of these criteria, “avoid” is intended as cautionary
guidance, not a prohibition of the use.
(3) “Incompatible” means that the land use should not be permitted under any normal
circumstances. Limited exceptions are possible for site-specific special
circumstances. See Section 3.8.
(b) Land use types not specifically listed in the Table 3A shall be evaluated using the criteria
for similar listed uses. The Occupancy Load Factor (square feet per person) listed for many
nonresidential uses can be used as a comparative guide in this regard. In all cases,
proposed nonresidential uses must meet the Intensity criteria listed in the table header.
(c) Multiple land use categories and the compatibility criteria associated with them may
apply to a Project. Mixed-use developments shall be evaluated in accordance with Policy
3.2.7.
3.2.3. Compatibility Policy Map: The Compatibility Zones depicted in the Compatibility Policy Map (Map
3A) for the Ukiah Municipal Airport takes into account all four compatibility concerns in a
composite manner—noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight.
(a) Table 3B Compatibility Factors, identifies the general contributions of noise, safety,
airspace protection, and overflight factors to the delineation of each of the Compatibility
Zones. The table also describes the specific aeronautical and geographic considerations
used in creation of the Compatibility Policy Map.
Page 212 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(b) The Compatibility Policy Map gives special consideration to the Density of existing
residential development in the Compatibility Zone 3 and 4 areas north and west of the
Airport compared to locations elsewhere in the Airport Influence Area by designating an
Urban Overlay Zone. The residential Density compatibility criteria in Table 3A for
locations within the Urban Overlay Zone reflect the existing development pattern. This
Density is higher than for other locations with comparable proximity to the runway.
(c) The Compatibility Policy Map also includes a Compatibility Zone 1* that extends the length
of Compatibility Zone 1 at each end of the runway. The intent of Zone 1* is to help preserve
the option for ultimate extension of the runway to 5,000 feet to accommodate CalFire
Lockheed C-130 fire attack aircraft. The compatibility criteria for Zone 1* match those
of Zone A* in the 1996 ACLUP for Ukiah Municipal Airport and are listed in Table 3A.
(d) The individual compatibility factors can be used to help assess how heavily each factor
should be weighed when evaluating proposed Projects in a particular Compatibility Zone. It
also can serve to suggest what types of modifications to the Project might make the
proposal acceptable given the Project’s degree of sensitivity to a particular compatibility
factor (for example, knowing that a Noise-Sensitive Land Use is in a high-noise area may
indicate a need for sound attenuation in the structure, whereas a Land Use of Special
Concern in a high-risk area may need to be altered to reduce the number of people
present).
3.2.4. Function of Supporting Criteria: Table 3A, Basic Compatibility Criteria, represents a compilation
of compatibility criteria associated with each of the four types of airport impacts listed in
Policy 1.3.1 and described in Sections 3.4 through 3.7. For the purposes of reviewing
proposed amendments to general plans, specific plans, zoning ordinances, and building
regulations, as well as in the review of most individual Project proposals, the criteria in Table
3A are anticipated to suffice. However, certain complex Land Use Actions may require more
intensive review. The ALUC may refer to the supporting criteria, as listed in Sections 3.4
through 3.8 to clarify or supplement its review of such Land Use Actions.
3.2.5. Residential Development: The following criteria shall be applied to the evaluation of the
compatibility of proposed residential Land Use Actions.
(a) Any subdivision of land for residential uses within Compatibility Zones 2 through 5 shall
not result in an average or single-acre Density greater than that indicated in Table 3A
and Policy 3.5.1. A Project site may include multiple parcels.
(b) Other development conditions as also listed in Table 3A apply to sites within certain
Compatibility Zones.
(c) See Policy 1.5.4 for exceptions regarding existing parcels, accessory dwelling units, and
other development by right.
3.2.6. Nonresidential Development: The usage Intensity (people per acre) limits indicated in Table 3A
for each Compatibility Zone are the fundamental criteria against which the safety compatibility
of most proposed nonresidential Land Use Actions shall be measured. Table 3A sets usage
Intensity (people/acre) limits measured with respect to both a Project site as a whole and any
single acre within the site. Proposed Projects must comply with both limits. See Policy 3.5.3
for guidance on calculating usage Intensities. Additional criteria listed in Table 3A shall also
apply.
(a) The total number of people permitted on a Project site at any time, except for Rare Special
Events (see Policy 3.8.1), must not exceed the indicated usage Intensity times the total
Page 213 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–5
acreage of the site. Usage Intensity calculations shall include all people (e.g. employees,
customers/visitors, etc.) who may be on the property at any single point in time during
typical peak-period usage, whether indoors or outside.
(b) No single acre of a Project site shall exceed the number of people per acre listed in Table
3A and calculated in accordance with Policy 3.5.3. For Project sites less than 1.0 acre, the
occupancy limit is proportionate to the number allowed in an entire single acre (for
example, if the Intensity limit for a single acre is 300 people, then a 0.5-acre site could
have up to 150 people).
(c) The noise exposure limitations cited in Policy 3.4.1 shall be the basis for assessing the
acceptability of proposed nonresidential land uses relative to noise impacts. The ability
of buildings to satisfy the interior noise level criteria noted in Policy 3.4.2 shall also be
considered.
3.2.7. Mixed-Use Development: Projects involving a mixture of residential and nonresidential uses shall
be evaluated as follows:
(a) Where the residential and nonresidential uses are proposed to be situated on separate
parts of the Project site, the residential and nonresidential components shall be evaluated
as separate developments. Each component of the Project must meet the criteria for the
respective land use category in Table 3A. Specifically, the residential Density shall be
calculated with respect to the area(s) to be devoted to residential land uses and the
nonresidential Intensity calculated with respect to the area(s) proposed for nonresidential
uses. This provision means that the residential Density cannot be averaged over the entire
Project site when nonresidential uses will occupy some of the area. The same limitation
applies in reverse—that is, the nonresidential Intensity cannot be averaged over an area
that includes residential uses.
(b) Mixed-use Projects in which residential uses are proposed to be located in conjunction
with nonresidential uses in the same or nearby buildings on the same site must meet
both the residential Density and nonresidential Intensity criteria of each land use category
proposed to be included in the Project. However, mixed-use Projects in which the
residential uses are proposed to comprise less than 50% of the total floor area of an
individual building, need not comply with the applicable residential Density limits.
(1) Regardless of the amount of residential use in the Project, for the purposes of
compliance with usage Intensity criteria in Table 3A, the normal occupancy of the
residential component shall be added to that of the nonresidential component and
the total occupancy shall be evaluated with respect to the nonresidential usage
Intensity criteria cited in Table 3A. The ALUC may make exceptions to this
provision if the residential and nonresidential components of the Project would
clearly not be simultaneously occupied to their maximum Intensities.
(2) Paragraph (b) of this policy is intended for dense, urban-type land use Projects where
the resultant ambient noise levels are relatively high. See Paragraph (a) for Projects
in which the residential component is isolated from the nonresidential uses of the
site.
(c) Noise attenuation and other requirements that may be specifically relevant to residential
uses shall apply to mixed-use Projects containing residences.
Page 214 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(d) Residential uses in a mixed-use development shall not be allowed where the residential
component would be situated in a Compatibility Zone where residential development is
indicated as “Incompatible” in Table 3A.
3.2.8. Other Development Conditions: All types of proposed Projects shall be required to meet the
additional conditions listed in Table 3A for the Compatibility Zone where the Project is to be
located. Among these conditions are the following:
(a) Avigation Easement Dedication: Dedication of an Avigation Easement is required for
Projects in parts of the Airport Influence Area, primarily areas closest to the runways. See
Policy 3.3.6.
(b) Recorded Overflight Notification: Recording of an Overflight Notification is required as a
condition for approval of new residential or nonresidential Project in Compatibility Zone 6.
See Policy 3.7.1.
(c) Airport Proximity Disclosure: Airport Proximity Disclosure is required in conjunction with
certain real estate transactions involving property within the Airport Influence Area. See
Policy 3.7.2.
(d) Noise Level Reduction: Special features may be necessary to reduce interior noise levels
for some types of new construction near the Airport. See Policy 3.4.2.
(e) Airspace Review: Proposals for tall buildings, antennas, and other tall objects near the
runway ends or on high terrain may require ALUC review. See Policy 3.6.1.
3.3. Criteria for Special Circumstances
3.3.1. Sites Split by Two or More Compatibility Zones: For the purposes of evaluating consistency with
the compatibility criteria in Table 3A, Basic Compatibility Criteria, a Project shall be evaluated
as follows:
(a) Any Project site that is split by Compatibility Zone boundaries shall be considered as if it
were multiple sites divided at the Compatibility Zone boundary line. See Exhibit 1 for
example.
(b) The criteria for each Compatibility Zone within which portions of the site are located shall
apply to the proposed building(s) or areas of outdoor congregation of people within
that portion.
Page 215 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–7
3.3.2. Transferring Usage Intensity: When a Project
site is split by a Compatibility Zone,
modification of the site plan so as to
transfer the allowed Density of residential
development or Intensity of nonresidential
development from the more restricted
portion to the less restricted portion is
encouraged. The purpose of this policy is
to move people outside of the higher-risk
zones.
(a) This full or partial reallocation of
Density or Intensity is permitted even if
the resulting Intensity in the less
restricted area would then exceed the
sitewide average Density or Intensity
limits that apply within that
Compatibility Zone (see Exhibit 2).
(b) The single-acre Intensity criterion for the zone to which the use is transferred must still
be satisfied.
3.3.3. Existing Nonconforming Uses: Proposed changes to Existing Nonconforming Uses (including a
parcel or building) that are not in conformance with the criteria in this UKIALUCP shall be
limited as follows:
Exhibit 2: Transferring Usage Intensity
An example of transferring usage Intensity to the less re-
strictive compatibility zone is provided below.
Project Site
Zone 2: 4.0 acres
Zone 3: 1.0 acre
Allowable Total Occupancy
Zone 2: 60 people/acre * 2.0 acres = 120 people
Zone 3: 100 people/acre * 1.0 acre = 100 people
Total Allowed on Site: 260 people
Total Allowed on Single Acre in 3: 300 people
Transfer People from Zone 2 to Zone 3
Zone 2: 0 people
Zone 3: 260 people
* 260 people in 1.0 acre exceeds the average 100 peo-
ple/acre limit for Zone 3, but is allowable under usage
Intensity transfer policy as it does not exceed the sin-
gle-acre Intensity limit of 300 people.
Exhibit 1: Split by Compatibility Zones
In this example, the restaurant and office uses are split
between Compatibility Zones 2 and 3. When determining
compliance with the Zone 2 Intensity limits, only the por-
tions of the uses in Zone 2, together with the retail use
that is fully in Zone 2 are considered. The size of the site
in Zone 2 is 3.5 acres.
Compatibility Zone 2
Retail: 50,000 s.f. = 294 people
170 s.f. per person
Restaurant: 50% of 18,000 s.f. = 150 people
60 s.f. per person
Office: 50% of 24,000 s.f. = 56 people
215 s.f. per person
Total Occupancy = 500 people
Intensity: 500 people = 143 people/acre*
3.5 acres
* Would exceed Zone 2 sitewide average limit of 60
people/acre and would be deemed inconsistent.
Compatibility Zone 3
A similar analysis is required for the uses in Zone 3. Zo
n
e
2
Zo
n
e
3
Page 216 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–8 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(a) Residential uses.
(1) A Nonconforming residential land use may be continued, sold, leased, or rented
without restriction and is not subject to this UKIALUCP or ALUC review.
(2) A Nonconforming single-family dwelling may be maintained, remodeled,
reconstructed (see Policy 3.3.4), or expanded in size. The lot line of an existing
single-family residential parcel may be adjusted. Also, a new single-family residence
may be constructed on an existing lot in accordance with Policy 1.5.4
(Development by Right). However:
▪ Any remodeling, Reconstruction, or expansion must not increase the number of
dwelling units (excluding accessory dwelling units as defined by state law and
Local Agency ordinances).37 For example, a bedroom could be added to an
existing residence, but an additional dwelling unit could not be built on the
parcel unless that unit is an accessory dwelling unit.
▪ Any increase in height must comply with the policies in Section 3.6 (Airspace
Protection Compatibility Policies).
▪ A single-family residential parcel may not be divided for the purpose of allowing
additional dwellings to be constructed.
(3) Nonconforming multi-family residential dwellings may be maintained, remodeled, or
reconstructed (see Policy 3.3.4(a)). The size of individual dwelling units may be
increased, but additional dwelling units may not be added.
(4) The Avigation Easement dedication and sound attenuation requirements set by
Policies 3.3.6 and 3.4.2 shall apply.
(b) Nonresidential uses (other than children’s schools):
(1) A Nonconforming nonresidential use may be continued, sold, leased, or rented
without restriction or ALUC review provided that no discretionary Local Agency
approval (such as a conditional use permit) is required.
(2) Nonconforming nonresidential facilities may be maintained, altered, or, if required by
state law, reconstructed (see Policy 3.3.4). However, any such work:
▪ Must not result in expansion of either the portion of the site devoted to the
Nonconforming Use or the floor area of the buildings; and
▪ Must not result in an increase in the usage Intensity (people per acre) above the
levels existing at the time of adoption of this UKIALUCP.
▪ Must not increase the storage or use of hazardous materials.
(3) The Avigation Easement dedication and sound attenuation requirements set by
Policies 3.3.6 and 3.4.2 shall apply.
(c) Children’s schools (including grades K-12, day care centers with more than 14 children,
and school libraries):
(1) Land acquisition for new schools or expansion of existing school sites is not
permitted in Compatibility Zones 1 through 5.
(2) Replacement or expansion of buildings at existing schools is not allowed in
Compatibility Zones 1 and 2. In Zones 3 through 5, a one-time expansion
accommodating no more than 50 students is permitted. This limitation does not
preclude work required for normal maintenance or repair.
37 Government Code, Section 65852.2.
Page 217 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–9
(3) The Avigation Easement dedication and sound attenuation requirements set by
Policies 3.3.6 and 3.4.2 shall apply.
3.3.4. Reconstruction: An Existing Nonconforming building or land use that has been fully or partially
destroyed as the result of a calamity or natural catastrophe, and would not otherwise be
reconstructed but for such event, may be rebuilt only under the following conditions:38
(a) Single-family or multi-family residential Nonconforming Uses may be rebuilt provided that
the Reconstruction does not result in more dwelling units than existed on the parcel at the
time of the damage. Addition of an accessory dwelling unit to a single-family residence
is permitted if in accordance with state law and local regulations.39 Additional dwelling
units in a multi-family residential development are also permitted if the additional units
are allowed by right under local regulations.
(b) Nonconforming nonresidential improvements may be rebuilt, even if completely
destroyed, provided that the reconstruction does not increase the floor area of the
previous structure or result in an increased intensity of use (i.e., more people per acre).
(c) Reconstruction under Paragraphs (a) or (b) above:
(1) Must have a permit deemed complete by the Local Agency within the time frame
established by that agency.
(2) Shall incorporate sound attenuation features to the extent required by Policy 3.4.2.
(3) Shall require dedication of an Avigation Easement to the City of Ukiah if required
under Policy 3.3.6.
(4) Shall record an Overflight Notification in the chain of title of the property if required
by Policy 3.7.1.
(5) Shall comply with 14 CFR Part 77 Airspace Protection Surface requirements (see
Section 3.6).
(d) Reconstruction in accordance with Paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) above shall not be permitted
in Compatibility Zone 1 or where it would be in conflict (not in conformance) with the
general plan or zoning ordinance of the Local Agency.
(e) Nothing in the above policies is intended to preclude work required for normal
maintenance and repair.
3.3.5. Infill: Where land uses not in conformance with the criteria set forth in this UKIALUCP
exist at the time of the plan’s adoption, Infill development of similar land uses may
nevertheless be allowed to occur in that area even if the proposed land use is otherwise
incompatible with respect to the compatibility criteria for that location.
(a) Infill nonresidential development is allowed in all Compatibility Zones except Compatibility
Zone 1 but is discouraged in Compatibility Zone 2.
(b) Infill is not applicable to residential development. Increased Density is enabled through
use of the Urban Overlay Zone assigned to Zones 3 and 4 north and west of the Airport.
See Policy 3.2.3(b) for details.
(c) To qualify as Infill nonresidential development, a project site must either:
38 Reconstruction differs from Redevelopment (see Policy 1.2.35 for definition) that is subject to the provisions of this UKIALUCP.
39 Government Code, Section 65852.2.
Page 218 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–10 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(1) Be part of a cohesive area, defined by the Local Agency and approved by the ALUC,
within which at least 65% of the uses were developed prior to the UKIALUCP
adoption with uses not in conformance with the UKIALUCP; or
(2) Meet all of the following conditions:
▪ Already be served with streets, water, sewer, and other infrastructure;
▪ Have at least 65% of the site’s perimeter (disregarding roads) bounded by
existing uses similar to, or more intensive than, those proposed;
▪ Be no larger than 20 acres;
▪ Not extend the perimeter of the Infill area defined by the surrounding, already
developed, incompatible uses;
▪ Cannot previously have been set aside as open land in accordance with Policy
3.5.6 unless replacement open land is provided within the same Compatibility
Zone; and
▪ Must be consistent with the Local Agency’s zoning regulations governing the
existing, already developed, surrounding area.
(d) In locations that qualify as nonresidential Infill under Paragraph (c) above, the average
usage Intensity (the number of people per acre) of the site’s proposed use shall not exceed
the lesser of:
▪ The median Intensity of all existing
nonresidential uses that lie fully or partially
within a distance of 300 feet from the
boundary of the defined Infill area; or
▪ Double the average sitewide Intensity permitted
in accordance with the criteria for that location
as indicated in Table 3A.
(e) The single-acre Intensity limits for nonresidential
development described listed in Table 3A are applicable to Infill development. Also,
Avigation Easement dedication and sound attenuation requirements set by Policies 3.3.6
and 3.4.2 shall apply to Infill development.
(f) The preference of this policy is that all parcels eligible for Infill nonresidential
development be identified at one time by the Local Agency.
(1) The Local Agency is responsible for identifying, in its general plan or other adopted
planning document approved by the ALUC, the qualifying locations that lie within
that agency’s boundaries. This action may take place in conjunction with the process
of amending a general plan for consistency with the ALUC plan or may be
submitted by the Local Agency for consideration by the ALUC at the time of initial
adoption of this UKIALUCP.
(2) If a map identifying locations suitable for Infill has not been submitted by the Local
Agency and approved by the ALUC or the site of an individual Project proposal does
not fall within the identified Infill area, the ALUC may evaluate the Project when
referred for review under Policy 1.4.2 to determine whether it would meet the
qualifying conditions listed in Paragraph (c) plus the applicable provisions in
Paragraphs (d) and (e) of this policy.
(3) In either case, the burden for demonstrating that an area or an individual site
qualifies as Infill rests with the affected Local Agency and/or Project proponent and is
not the responsibility of the ALUC.
Example: If the zone allows an
average sitewide Intensity of 100
people per acre and the median
Intensity of nearby existing uses
is 150 people per acre, the Infill
development would be limited to
150 people per acre rather than
200.
Page 219 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–11
3.3.6. Avigation Easement Dedication: As a condition for approval of Projects that are subject to the
review provisions of this UKIALUCP and that meet the conditions in Paragraphs (a) and
(b) of this policy, the property owner shall be required to dedicate an Avigation Easement to
the City of Ukiah as owner of the Ukiah Municipal Airport.
(a) Avigation Easement dedication is required for all off-airport Projects situated on a site that
lies completely or partially within any of the following portions of the Airport Influence
Area:
(1) Within Compatibility Zones 1 through 5.
(2) Within the Airspace Critical Protection Zone as defined in Policy 3.6.1(c).
(3) Within the Airspace High Terrain Zone as defined by Policy 3.6.1(d).
(b) Avigation Easement dedication shall be required for any proposed Project, including Infill
development, for which discretionary Local Agency approval is required. Avigation
Easement dedication is not required for ministerial approvals such as building permits or
Land Use Actions associated with modification of existing single-family residences.
(c) The Avigation Easement shall:
(1) Provide the right of flight in the airspace above the property;
(2) Allow the generation of noise and other impacts associated with aircraft overflight;
(3) Restrict the height of structures, trees, and other objects in accordance with the
policies in Section 3.6 and the Airspace Protection Zones (Map 3B);
(4) Permit access to the property for the removal or aeronautical marking of objects
exceeding the established height limit; and
(5) Prohibit electrical interference, glare, and other potential hazards to flight from
being created on the property.
(d) An example of an Avigation Easement is provided in Appendix G.
3.4. Noise Compatibility Policies
NOISE COMPATIBILITY POLICIES BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The following Noise Compatibility Policies Background Information has been considered in formulating the noise
compatibility criteria in this section. However, it is provided for informational purposes only and does not itself
constitute UKIALUCP policy. For additional discussion of noise compatibility concepts, see Appendix C.
Policy Objective
The purpose of noise compatibility policies is to avoid establishment of Noise-Sensitive Land Uses in the portions
of the airport environs that are exposed to significant levels of aircraft noise.
Measures of Noise Exposure
As is standard practice in California, this UKIALUCP uses the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) metric
as the primary basis for evaluating the degree to which lands around the airport are exposed to airport-related
noise. CNEL is a cumulative noise metric in that it takes into account not just the loudness of individual noise
events, but also the number of events over time. Cumulative exposure to aircraft noise is depicted by a set of
contours, each of which represents points having the same CNEL value.
The noise contours for Ukiah Municipal Airport are presented in Chapter 4 of this UKIALUCP and reflect the
airport activity levels in Exhibit 4-3. The noise contours in Exhibit 4-4 represent the greatest annualized noise
impact, measured in terms of CNEL, which is anticipated to be generated by the aircraft operating at the airport
over the planning time frame. Map 4-4 also depicts the Cal Fire aircraft noise contours for a typical fire event day.
Page 220 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–12 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Factors Considered in Setting Noise Compatibility Policies
Factors considered in setting the policies in this section include the following:
▪ Established state regulations and guidelines, including noise compatibility recommendations in the California
Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (2011).
▪ Ambient noise levels in the community, as well as noise from other transportation noise sour ces. Ambient noise
levels influence the potential intrusiveness of aircraft noise upon a particular land use and vary greatly between
rural, suburban, and urban communities.
▪ The extent to which noise would intrude upon and interrupt the activity associated with a particular use.
Susceptibility to speech interference or sleep disturbance as a result of single -event noise levels is a factor in
this regard. Noise levels above approximately 65 dBA are sufficient to cause speech interference. Highly Noise-
Sensitive Land Uses include residences, schools, libraries, and outdoor theaters.
▪ The extent to which the land use activity itself generates noise.
▪ The extent of outdoor activity, particularly noise-sensitive activities, associated with a particular land use.
▪ The extent to which indoor uses associated with a particular land use may be made compatible with application
of sound attenuation. (Typical new building construction provides sufficient insulation to attenuate outdoor-to-
indoor noise by at least 20 dB.)
3.4.1. Maximum Acceptable Exterior Noise Exposure: To minimize Noise-Sensitive development in noisy
areas around the Airport, proposed Land Use Actions shall comply with the following.
(1) The maximum CNEL considered normally acceptable for residential uses in the
vicinity of the Airport is 60 dB. The CNEL 60 dB contour depicting the Cal Fire
Attack Aircraft Typical Fire-Event Day (Exhibit 4-4) is one of the factors
considered in establishing the Compatibility Zone boundaries and residential Density
criteria.
(2) Except as allowed by right in accordance with Policy 1.5.4, the maximum average
and single-acre Density of residential uses in Compatibility Zones 2 through 5 shall be
as indicated in Table 3A, Basic Compatibility Criteria, and Policy 3.5.1.
(b) New nonresidential development shall be deemed incompatible in locations where the
airport-related noise exposure would be highly disruptive to the specific land use.
(1) Highly Noise-Sensitive Land Uses are flagged with a symbol () in Table 3A, Basic
Compatibility Criteria.
(2) Caution must be exercised with regard to approval of outdoor uses—the potential
for aircraft noise to disrupt the activity shall be taken into account.
(3) Uses that are primarily indoor are acceptable if sound attenuation is provided in
accordance with Policy 3.4.2 and as noted in Table 3A.
3.4.2. Maximum Acceptable Interior Noise Levels: To minimize disruption of indoor activities by
aircraft noise, new structures within Compatibility Zones 2 through 5 shall incorporate sound
attenuation design features sufficient to meet the interior noise level criteria specified by this
policy. All future structures outside of these Compatibility Zones are presumed to meet the
interior noise level requirement with no special added construction techniques.40
(a) For the following land uses, the aircraft-related interior noise level shall be no greater
than CNEL 45 dB.
40 A typical mobile home has an exterior-to-interior noise level reduction (NLR) of at least 15 dB with windows closed. Wood
frame buildings constructed to meet current standards for energy efficiency typically have an NLR of at least 20 dB with
windows closed.
Page 221 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–13
(1) Any habitable room of single or multi-family residences (including family day care
homes with 14 or fewer children);
(2) Hotels, motels, and other long-term and short-term lodging;
(3) Hospitals, nursing homes and other congregate care facilities;
(4) Places of worship, meeting halls, theaters, and mortuaries; and
(5) Schools, libraries, and museums.
(b) When structures are part of a proposed Land Use Action, evidence that the structures will
be designed to comply with the criteria in Paragraph (a) of this Policy shall be submitted
to the involved Local Agency as part of the building permit process. The calculations
should assume that windows are closed. The ALUC also may request this information
if it is necessary for making a consistency determination; however, the Local Agency shall
be responsible for assuring compliance.
(c) Exceptions to the interior noise level criteria in Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this policy may
be allowed where evidence is provided that the indoor noise generated by the use itself
exceeds the listed criteria.
3.4.3. Noise-Sensitive Land Uses: Single-event noise levels should be considered when evaluating the
compatibility of highly Noise-Sensitive Land Uses such as residences, schools, libraries, and
outdoor theaters (see Policy 1.2.26). Susceptibility to speech interference and sleep
disturbance are among the factors that make certain land uses noise sensitive. The
compatibility evaluations in Table 3A take into account single-event noise concerns.
(a) The ALUC may require acoustical studies or on-site noise measurements to assist in
determining the compatibility of Land Use Actions involving Noise-Sensitive Land Uses.
(b) Single-event noise levels are especially important in areas that are regularly overflown
by aircraft, but that do not produce significant CNEL contours (helicopter overflight
areas are a particular example). Flight patterns for the Airport should be considered in
the review process including in locations beyond the mapped noise contours. The flight
patterns for Ukiah Municipal Airport are depicted in Figure 4-6 in Chapter 4.
3.5. Safety Compatibility Policies
SAFETY COMPATIBILITY POLICIES BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The following Safety Compatibility Policies Background Information has been considered in formulating the safety
compatibility criteria in this section. However, it is provided for informational purposes only and does not itself
constitute ALUC policy. For additional discussion of safety compatibility concepts, see Appendix C.
Policy Objective
The intent of land use safety compatibility policies is to minimize the risks associated with an off -airport aircraft
accident or emergency landing. The policies focus on reducing the potential consequences of such events should
they occur. Risks both to people and property in the vicinity of the Airport and to people on board the aircraft are
considered (land use features that can be the cause of an aircraft accident are addressed under Airspace
Protection, Section 3.6.)
Measures of Risk Exposure
This UKIALUCP evaluates the risk that potential aircraft accidents pose to lands and people around the Airport in
terms of two parameters: where aircraft accidents are most likely to occur near the Airport; and the potential
consequences if an accident occurs in one of those locations.
Page 222 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–14 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
▪ The accident likelihood is measured in terms of the geographic distribution of where accidents have historically
occurred around other airports having similar types of activity. Because aircraft accidents are infrequent
occurrences, the pattern of accidents at any one airport cannot be used to predict where future accidents are
most likely to happen around that airport. Reliance must be placed on data about aircraft accident locations at
comparable airports nationally, refined with respect to information about the characteristics of aircraft use at
the individual airport.
▪ The consequences component of the risk considers the number of people in harm’s way and their ability to
escape harm. For most nonresidential development, potential consequences are measured in terms of the
usage Intensity—the number of people per acre on the site. Local development standards (e.g., floor area
ratios, parking requirements) and building code occupancies can be used to calculate nonresidential usage
Intensities. For residential development, Density—the number of dwelling units per acre—is substituted for
Intensity. Additional criteria are applicable to specific types of uses.
Factors Considered in Setting Safety Compatibility Policies
Factors considered in setting the policies in this section include the following:
▪ The runway length, approach categories, normal flight patterns, and aircraft fleet mix at the Airport. These
factors are reflected in the Compatibility Zones shapes and sizes.
▪ The locations, delineated with respect to the Airport runway, where aircraft accidents typically occur near
airports and the relative concentration of accidents within these locations. The most stringent land use controls
are applied to the areas with the greatest potential accident exposure. The risk information utilized is the
general aviation accident data and analyses contained in the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook.
The Handbook guidance regarding safety compatibility forms the basis for the safety component of the
composite Compatibility Zones established for the Airport and the maximum usage intensities (people per
acre) criteria indicated in Table 3A, Basic Compatibility Criteria.
▪ Handbook guidance regarding residential densities in rural and suburban areas. Residential Density limitations
cannot be equated to the usage Intensity limitations for nonresidential uses. Consistent with pervasive societal
views and as suggested by the Handbook guidelines, a greater degree of protection is warranted for residential
uses.
▪ The presence of Risk-Sensitive Land Uses—uses having characteristics that represent safety concerns
regardless of the number of people present; specifically: vulnerable occupants (children, elderly, disabled),
hazardous materials, and critical community infrastructure.
▪ The extent to which development covers the ground and thus limits the options of where an aircraft in distress
can attempt an emergency landing.
▪ The extent to which the occupied parts of a Project site are concentrated in a small area. Concentrated high
Intensities heighten the risk to occupants if an aircraft should strike the location where the development is
concentrated. To guard against this risk, limitations on the maximum concentrations of dwellings or people in
a small area of a large Project site are appropriate.
3.5.1. Residential Development Density Criteria: Proposed residential development shall be evaluated
in accordance with the following criteria:
(a) The maximum allowable Density for proposed residential development shall be as
indicated in Table 3A, Basic Compatibility Criteria, for each Compatibility Zone. All
proposed residential uses must comply with both the “sitewide average” and “single -
acre” Density limits indicated for the Compatibility Zone or Zones in which the Project is
located.
(1) The “sitewide average” Density equals the total number of dwelling units divided by
the Project site size in acres (i.e., the total acreage of the Project site) which may include
multiple parcels.
(2) The “single-acre” Density equals the maximum number of dwelling units in any
single acre of the Project.
(b) Clustering of residential development within any single acre of a Project site shall be
limited as follows:
(1) Within Compatibility Zone 1, residential development is not permitted.
Page 223 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–15
(2) Within Compatibility Zones 2 through 5, including within the Urban Overlay Zone,
clustering shall be limited to no more than 1.5 times the average Density as indicated
in Table 3A for the respective zone.
(c) If a residential land use Project is proposed for a site or parcel lying only partly within
Compatibility Zone 2 and residential uses are permitted on that site both under local land
use regulations and by right in accordance with Policy 1.5.4 in Chapter 2, the dwelling
shall, when feasible, be located on the portion of the site outside of these zones or, if
such siting is not feasible, then the maximum practical distance from the extended
runway centerline.
(d) Density bonuses and other bonuses or allowances that Local Agencies may provide for
affordable housing developed in accordance with the provisions of state and/or local
law or regulation shall be included when calculating residential densities. The overall
Density of a development Project, including any bonuses or allowances, must comply with
the allowable Density criteria of this UKIALUCP.
(e) Exceptions to Density criteria:
(1) The Density limits shall not prevent construction of a single-family home on a legal
lot of record as of the date of adoption of this UKIALUCP provided that the home
is not within Compatibility Zone 1 and the use is permitted by Local Agency land use
regulations (see Policy 1.5.4 in Chapter 2).
(2) Accessory dwelling units, as defined by state law and local regulations, shall be
excluded from Density calculations.41
(3) A family day care home serving 14 or fewer children may be established in any
existing dwelling or in any new dwelling permitted by the policies of this
UKIALUCP.42
(f) See Policy 3.2.7 with regard to calculating the Density of mixed-use development.
3.5.2. Nonresidential Development Intensity Criteria: Nonresidential development shall be evaluated in
accordance with the following criteria:
(a) The maximum allowable Intensity for proposed nonresidential development shall be as
indicated in Table 3A, Compatibility Criteria. All proposed nonresidential uses must
comply with both the “sitewide average” and “single-acre” Intensity limits indicated for
the Compatibility Zone or Zones in which the Project is located.
(1) Nonresidential Intensity shall be measured in terms of people per acre and shall be
determined as specified in this policy and Policy 3.5.3.
(2) Intensity calculations shall include all people (e.g., employees, customers/visitors)
who may be on the property at any single point in time, whether indoors or
outdoors. For the purposes of these calculations, the total number of occupants
during normal busiest periods shall be used.43
(3) Additional or more restrictive criteria may be applicable to Land Uses of Special
Concern (see Policy 3.5.5).
41 Government Code, Section 65852.2.
42 Health and Safety Code, Section 1596.78.
43 This number will typically be lower than the absolute maximum number of occupants the facility can accommodate (such
as would be used in determining compliance with building and fire codes).
Page 224 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–16 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(b) The need to calculate the usage Intensity of a particular Project proposal for compliance
with the Intensity criteria is to be governed by the following:
(1) Land use categories indicated as “Normally Compatible” for a particular
Compatibility Zone are presumed to meet the Intensity criteria indicated for the
Compatibility Zone. Calculation of the usage Intensity is not required unless the
particular Project proposal represents an atypical example of the usage type.
(2) Calculation of the usage Intensity must be done for all proposed Projects where the
land use category for the particular Compatibility Zone is indicated as “Conditional”
and the additional criteria column says “Ensure Intensity criteria met.”
(3) Land use categories indicated as “Conditional” for the particular Compatibility Zone,
but the criteria are other than “Ensure Intensity criteria met,” calculation of the usage
Intensity is not necessary for typical examples of the use. However, the Project
proposal must comply with the other criteria listed for the applicable land use
category.
(c) When a Project involves multiple types of nonresidential land use categories as listed in
Table 3A, the total occupancy for all categories shall be used for determining
compliance with the sitewide-average Intensity criteria. However, all components,
particularly the most intense ones, must comply with the single-acre Intensity criteria.
Also, any additional criteria listed in Table 3A for individual land use categories
involved in a Project must all be met. For Intensity criteria pertaining to mixed-use Projects
having both residential and nonresidential components, see Policy 3.2.7.
(d) No new structures intended to be regularly occupied are allowed in Compatibility Zone 1.
3.5.3. Methodology for Calculation of Nonresidential Intensities: Various methods are available by which
usage Intensities may be calculated (additional guidance is found in Appendix D).
(a) Calculation of Sitewide Average-Acre Intensity: The “sitewide average” Intensity equals
the total number of people expected to be on the entire Project site at any one time during
normal busiest periods divided by the site size in acres (i.e., the total acreage of the Project
site) which may include multiple parcels. The number of occupants for a particular
proposal or component thereof may be estimated by any of several methods:
(1) Dividing the square footage of the building or component use by the Occupancy Load
Factor for that use yields the number of occupants (see Exhibit 3 for an example).44
Unless data specific to a particular Project is available, the Occupancy Load Factors to
be used are as indicated in Table 3A. In considering any such exceptions, the
ALUC shall also take into account the potential for the use of a building to change
over time (see Policy 3.5.4).
(2) For uses with fixed seats—restaurants and theaters, for example—the occupancy
should be based upon the number of customer seats plus the number of employees.
(3) For many commercial and industrial uses, the occupancy can be estimated by
considering the number of parking spaces required by the Local Agency and
multiplying by the average number of occupants per vehicle (this method would
44 Occupancy Load Factors are based on information from various sources and are intended to represent busy-period usage
for typical examples of the land use category. Usually they will be greater than used in building and fire codes to represent the
maximum occupancy. They can be used as a factor in determining the appropriate land use category for unlisted uses or
atypical examples of a use.
Page 225 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–17
not be suitable for land uses where many users arrive by transit, bicycle, or other
means of transportation).
(4) For Projects involving a mixture of uses in a building, the Occupancy Load Factor for
each component use shall be applied to give the occupancy for that use, then the
component occupancies shall be added to determine total occupancy.
(b) Calculation of Single-Acre Intensity: The “single-acre” Intensity equals the number of
people expected to occupy the most intensively used 1.0-acre area(s) of the Project site at
any one time during normal busiest periods. The single-acre Intensity limits for each
Compatibility Zone are indicated in Table 3A. Calculation of the single-acre Intensity
depends upon the building footprint and site sizes and the distribution of activities on
the site.
(1) For Projects with sites less than 1.0 acre, the single-acre Intensity equals the total
number of people on the site divided by the site size.
(2) For Projects with sites more than 1.0 acre and a building footprint less than 1.0 acre,
the single-acre Intensity equals the total number of building occupants unless the
Project includes substantial outdoor occupancy in which case such usage shall be
taken into account.
(3) For Projects having both site size and building footprint of more than 1.0 acre, the
single-acre Intensity shall normally be calculated as the total number of building
occupants divided by the building footprint in acres. However, if the occupancy of
the building is concentrated in one area—the office area of a large warehouse, for
example—then the occupants of that area shall be included in the single-acre
calculation.
(4) The 1.0-acre areas to be evaluated shall normally match the building footprints,
provided that the buildings are generally rectangular (reasonably close to square)
and not elongated in shape and, for buildings larger than 1.0 acre, may represent a
portion of the building.
(5) If a building has multiple floors, then the total number of occupants on all floors
falling within the 1.0-acre footprint shall be counted.
3.5.4. Long-Term Changes in Occupancy: In evaluating compliance of a proposed nonresidential Project
with the usage Intensity criteria in Table 3A, the ALUC shall take into account the potential
for the use of a building to change over time. A building could have planned low -intensity
use initially, but later be converted to a higher-intensity use. Local Agencies must provide
permit language or other mechanisms to ensure continued compliance with the usage
Intensity criteria.45
3.5.5. Risk-Sensitive Land Uses: Certain types of land uses represent safety concerns irrespective of
the number of people associated with those uses. Risk-Sensitive Land Uses and the nature of
the concern are listed below along with the criteria applicable to these uses. In some cases,
these uses are not allowed in portions of the Airport environs regardless of the number of
occupants associated with the use. In other instances, these uses should be avoided—that
is, allowed only if an alternative site outside the zone would not serve the intended function.
45 Note that this provision applies only to new development and Redevelopment—Projects for which discretionary Local Agency
action is required. It does not to tenant improvements or other changes to existing buildings for which local approval is
ministerial.
Page 226 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–18 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
When the use is allowed, special measures should be taken to minimize hazards to the facility
and occupants if the facility were to be struck by an aircraft.
(a) Uses Having Vulnerable Occupants: These uses are ones in which the majority of
occupants are children, elderly, and/or disabled—people who have reduced effective
mobility or may be unable to respond to emergency situations.
(1) The primary uses in this category include, but are not limited to the following:
▪ Children’s schools (grades K–12).
▪ Day care centers (facilities with more than 14 children46).
▪ In-patient hospitals, mental hospitals, nursing homes, and similar medical
facilities where patients remain overnight.
▪ Congregate care facilities including retirement homes, assisted living, and
intermediate care facilities.
▪ Penal institutions.
(2) Except congregate care facilities, uses having vulnerable occupants are
incompatible within Compatibility Zones 1 through 5, including in the Urban Overlay
Zone. New sites or facilities or expansion of existing sites or facilities shall be
prohibited.
(3) Congregate care facilities are permitted in the Urban Overlay Zone provided that
Intensity criteria are met.
(4) All of the above uses shall be allowed within Compatibility Zone 6.
(b) Hazardous Materials Storage: Materials that are flammable, explosive, corrosive, or toxic
constitute special safety compatibility concerns to the extent that an aircraft accident
could cause release of the materials and thereby pose dangers to people and property in
the vicinity.
(1) Facilities in this category include, but are not limited to the following:
▪ First Group Facilities: Facilities such as oil refineries and chemical plants that
manufacture, process, and/or store bulk quantities of hazardous materials
generally for shipment elsewhere.
▪ Second Group Facilities: Facilities associated with otherwise compatible land
uses where hazardous materials are stored in smaller quantities primarily for on-
site use.
(2) Criteria for new facilities in the first group are as follows:
▪ Facilities in the first group are incompatible in Compatibility Zones 1 through 5.
New sites, new facilities, or expansion of existing sites or facili ties shall be
prohibited.
▪ In Compatibility Zone 6, facilities are allowed only if alternative sites outside Zone
6 would not serve the intended function.
(3) Criteria for new facilities in the second group are as follows:
▪ Bulk storage of hazardous materials for on-site use shall be prohibited in
Compatibility Zones 1 and 2.
46 Health and Safety Code, Section 1596.78.
Page 227 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–19
▪ In Compatibility Zones 3 and 5, only the following is allowed: 1) On-Airport storage
of aviation fuel and other aviation-related flammable materials; 2) storage of
nonaviation fuel or other flammable materials in underground tanks (e.g., gas
stations); and 3) storage of up to 6,000 gallons of nonaviation flammable
materials in aboveground tanks.
▪ In Compatibility Zone 4, bulk storage of hazardous materials should be avoided,
but storage of smaller amounts for near-term on-site use is acceptable.
Permitting agencies should evaluate the need for special measures to minimize
hazards if the facility should be struck by an aircraft.
▪ All facilities must comply with the Intensity limits set forth in Policy 3.5.2(a)(2)
and other criteria noted in Table 3A.
▪ All of the above uses shall be allowed within Compatibility Zone 6.
(c) Critical Community Infrastructure: This category pertains to facilities the damage or
destruction of which would cause significant adverse effects to public health and welfare
well beyond the immediate vicinity of the facility.
(1) These facilities include, but are not limited to, the following:
▪ Public safety facilities such as police and fire stations.
▪ Communications facilities including emergency communications, broadcast,
and cell phone towers.
▪ Primary, peaker, and renewable energy power plants, electrical substations, and
other utilities.
(2) Criteria for new or expanded facilities of these types are as follows:
▪ Public safety facilities are incompatible in Compatibility Zones 1 through 3. No
new sites or facilities or expansion of existing sites or facilities shall be allowed.
In Compatibility Zone 5, public safety facilities shall be allowed only if the facility
serves or has an Airport-Related function. In Compatibility Zone 4, creation or
expansion of these types of facilities shall be allowed only if an alternative site
outside of these zones would not serve the intended function of the facility.
Public safety facilities shall be allowed within Compatibility Zone 6.
▪ Communications facilities, except ones that are Airport-Related Uses, are
incompatible in Compatibility Zones 1 through 3. No new sites or facilities or
expansion of existing sites or facilities shall be allowed. In Compatibility Zone 4,
creation or expansion of these types of facilities shall be allowed only if an
alternative site outside of this zone would not serve the intended function of the
facility. Structures shall be located a maximum distance from the extended
runway centerline and comply with airspace protection criteria (e.g., height,
thermal plumes) set forth in Section 3.6 of this UKIALUCP. Communication
facilities shall be allowed within Compatibility Zone 6.
▪ Primary power plants are incompatible in Compatibility Zones 1 through 5; except
that they may be allowed in Compatibility Zone 6 if an alternative site outside of
this zone would not serve the intended function of the facility.
▪ Peaker plants, renewable energy power plants, electrical substations, and other
utilities are incompatible in Compatibility Zones 1 through 5. In Compatibility Zone
4, creation or expansion of these types of facilities shall be allowed only if an
alternative site outside of this zone would not serve the intended function of the
facility. Structures shall be located a maximum distance from the extended
runway centerline and comply with airspace protection criteria (e.g., height,
Page 228 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–20 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
electrical interference, thermal plumes) set forth in Section 3.6 of this
UKIALUCP. These facilities shall be allowed within Compatibility Zone 6.
3.5.6. Open Land: In the event that a light aircraft is forced to land away from the Airport, the risks
to the people on board can best be minimized by providing as much open land area as
possible within the Airport vicinity. This concept is based upon the fact that the majority of
light aircraft accidents and incidents occurring away from an airport runway are controlled
emergency landings in which the pilot has reasonable opportunity to select the landing site.
(a) To qualify as open land, an area should be:
(1) Free of most structures and other major obstacles such as walls, large trees or poles
(greater than 4 inches in diameter, measured 4 feet above the ground), and overhead
wires.
(2) Have minimum dimensions of approximately 75 feet by 300 feet.
(b) Roads and automobile parking lots are acceptable as open land areas if they meet the
above criteria.
(c) Open land requirements for each Compatibility Zone are specified in Table 3A. Open
land requirements do not apply within the Urban Overlay Zone.
(d) Open land requirements for each Compatibility Zone are to be applied with respect to the
entire zone. Individual parcels may be too small to accommodate the minimum-size
open area requirement. Consequently, the identification of open land areas must initially
be accomplished at the general plan or specific plan level or as part of large (10 acres or
more) development projects.
(e) Clustering of development and providing contiguous landscaped and parking areas is
encouraged as a means of increasing the size of open land areas. Clustering of
development should be located a maximum distance from the extended runway
centerline. However, see Policies 3.5.1(b) and 3.2.6(b), and Table 3A for limitations on
clustering of residential and nonresidential development on any single acre.
(f) Building envelopes and the Compatibility Zones should be indicated on all site plans and
tentative maps for Projects located within the Airport Influence Area. Portraying this
information is intended to assure that individual development Projects provide the open
land areas identified in the applicable general plan, specific plan, or other large -scale
plan.
3.6. Airspace Protection Compatibility Policies
AIRSPACE PROTECTION COMPATIBILITY POLICIES BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The following Airspace Protection Compatibility Policies Background Information has been considered in
formulating the Airspace Protection Compatibility policies in this section. However, it is provided for informational
purposes only and does not itself constitute UKIALUCP policy. For additional discussion of airspace protection
concepts, see Appendix C.
Policy Objective
Airspace protection compatibility policies seek to prevent creation of land use features that can pose hazards to
the airspace required by aircraft in flight and have the potential for causing an aircraft accident.
Page 229 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–21
Measures of Hazards to Airspace
Three categories of hazards to airspace are a concern: physical, visual, and electronic.
▪ Physical hazards include tall structures that have the potential to intrude upon protected airspace as well as
land use features that have the potential to attract birds or other potentially hazardous wildlife to the airport
area.
▪ Visual hazards include certain types of lights, sources of glare, and sources of dust, steam, or smoke.
▪ Electronic hazards are ones that may cause interference with aircraft communications or navigation.
Factors Considered in Setting Airspace Protection / Object Height Compatibility Policies
The UKIALUCP airspace protection policies rely upon the regulations and standards enacted by the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) and the State of California. The FAA has well-defined standards by which potential
hazards to flight, especially airspace obstructions, can be assessed. T he following FAA regulations and
documents, and any later versions of these documents, are specifically relevant.
▪ Code of Federal Regulations Title 14, Part 77 (14 CFR 77), Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of the
Navigable Airspace (provides standards regarding FAA notification of proposed objects and height limits of
objects near airports).
▪ FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Airport Design (provides standards regarding safety-related areas in the
immediate vicinity of runways).
▪ Advisory Circular 70/7460-1L, Obstruction Marking and Lighting (sets standards for how essential marking and
lighting should be designed).
These regulations and standards do not give the FAA authority to prevent the creation of hazards to flight. That
authority rests with state and local agencies. The State of California has enacted regulations enabling state and
local agencies to enforce the FAA standards. The UKIALUCP policies are intended to help implement the federal
and state regulations.
Factors Considered in Setting Airspace Protection / Wildlife Hazard Compatibility Policies
Natural features and agricultural practices may include open water and food sources that are attractive to wildlife,
especially waterfowl and other bird species. The UKIALUCP relies upon the wildlife hazard guidelines established
by the FAA in the following Advisory Circulars:
▪ FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports (provides guidance
on types of attractants to be avoided).
▪ FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-34A, Construction or Establishment of Landfills near Public Airports (sets
guidelines on proximity of these facilities to airports).
3.6.1. Evaluating Airspace Protection / Object Height Compatibility for Projects: The height of structures,
trees, and other objects associated with proposed Projects within the Ukiah Municipal Airport
Influence Area shall be evaluated in accordance with:
(a) The policies in this section together with the Airspace Protection Zones (Map 3B) drawn
in accordance with 14 CFR Part 77, Subpart C and reflecting the runway length,
runway end locations, and approach type for the Airport. The Airspace Protection Zones
for Ukiah Municipal Airport are depicted in Map 3B. These surfaces reflect both the
existing and planned future configuration of the runway.
(b) Additionally, where an FAA Aeronautical Study of a proposed object has been required
as described in Policy 3.6.3, the results of that study shall be taken into account by the
ALUC and the Local Agency in determining compliance with the criteria of this section.
(c) The Airspace Critical Protection Zone consists of the 14 CFR Part 77 primary surface and
the area beneath portions of the approach and transitional surfaces to where these
surfaces intersect with the horizontal surface together with the Airspace High Terrain Zone.
Page 230 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–22 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(d) The Airspace High Terrain Zone consists of the Airspace Critical Protection Zone together with
locations where the ground elevation exceeds or is within 35 feet beneath an Airspace
Protection Surface.
3.6.2. Object Height Criteria: The criteria for determining the acceptability of a Project with respect to
height are as follows:
(a) Except as provided in Paragraphs (b) and (c) of this policy, no object, including a mobile
object such as a vehicle or temporary object such as construction crane, shall have a
height that would result in penetration of an Airspace Protection Surface. Any object that
penetrates one of these surfaces is, by FAA definition, deemed an obstruction.47
(b) Objects not situated within an Airspace Critical Protection Zone (see definition in Policy
3.6.1(c)) may be allowed to have heights that penetrate the Airspace Protection Surfaces
defined by CFR Part 77 criteria under the following conditions:
(1) The objects have a height of 35 feet or less above ground level.
(2) The height of all objects is subject to Local Agency zoning limits.
(c) Unless exempted under Paragraph (b) of this policy, a proposed object having a height
that exceeds any Airspace Protection Surface shall be allowed only if all of the following
apply:
(1) As the result of an Aeronautical Study, the FAA determines that the object would
not be a hazard to air navigation.
(2) FAA or other expert analysis conducted under the auspices of the ALUC or the
Airport operator concludes that, despite being an airspace obstruction (not
necessarily a hazard), the object that would not cause any of the following:
▪ An increase in the ceiling or visibility minimums of the Airport for an existing or
planned instrument procedure (a planned procedure is one that is formally on
file with the FAA);
▪ A reduction of the established operational efficiency and capacity of the Airport,
such as by causing the usable length of the runway to be reduced; or
▪ Conflict with the visual flight rules (VFR), airspace used for the airport traffic
pattern or en route navigation to and from the Airport.
(3) Marking and lighting of the object will be installed as directed by the FAA
Aeronautical Study or the California Division of Aeronautics and in a manner
consistent with FAA standards in effect at the time the construction is proposed.48
(4) An Avigation Easement is dedicated in accordance with Policy 3.3.6.
(5) The proposed Project/plan complies with all other policies of this UKIALUCP.
3.6.3. Requirements for FAA Notification of Proposed Construction or Alteration: Project proponents are
responsible for notifying the FAA about proposed construction that may affect navigable
airspace.49 The following is ALUC policy on this topic.
47 An obstruction may or may not be a hazard. The purpose of FAA aeronautical studies is to determine whether an obstruction
is a hazard and, if so, what remedy is recommended. The FAA’s remedies are limited to making changes to the airspace and
an airport’s approach procedures, but it also can indicate an objection to proposed structures that it deems to be a hazard.
48 Advisory Circular 70/7460-1J, Obstruction Marking and Lighting, or any later FAA guidance.
49 14 CFR Part 77 requires that a Project proponent submit notification of a proposal to the FAA where required by the
provisions of 14 CFR Part 77, Subpart B. California Public Utilities Code Sections 21658 and 21659 likewise includes this
Page 231 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–23
(a) The boundaries of the FAA notification area for Ukiah Municipal Airport are depicted on
Map 3B, Airspace Protection Zone.
(b) Reference to FAA notification requirements is included here for informational purposes
only, not as an ALUC policy.
(c) Local Agencies shall inform Project proponents of the requirements for notification to the
FAA.
(d) FAA review is required for any proposed structure more than 200 feet above the surface
level of its site. All such proposals also shall be submitted to the ALUC for review
regardless of where within the jurisdiction of the ALUC they would be located.
(e) The requirement for notification to the FAA shall not by itself trigger an airport
compatibility review of a Project by the ALUC. If the general plan of the Local Agency in
which the Project is to be located has been determined by the ALUC to be consistent
with this UKIALUCP, then no ALUC review is required. If the general plan has not
been made consistent, then the proposed Project must be referred to the ALUC for
review if it qualifies as a Major Land Use Action (see Policy 1.4.5).
(f) Any Project submitted to the ALUC for airport land use compatibility review for reason
of height-limit issues shall include a copy of the 14 CFR Part 77 notification form (Form
7460-1) with the FAA findings from its aeronautical study (i.e., notice of determination
letter). A proposed Project may be referred to the ALUC in advance of the completion
of the FAA Aeronautical Study. However, the completed Aeronautical Study must be
forwarded to the ALUC when available and the ALUC may reconsider its previous
consistency determination if the FAA study provides new information and airspace
protection was a factor in the ALUC’s determination.
3.6.4. Criteria for Other Flight Hazards: Land uses that may cause visual, electronic, or wildlife
hazards, particularly bird strike hazards, to aircraft in flight or taking off or landing at the
Airport shall not be allowed within the Airport Influence Area unless the uses are consistent
with FAA rules and regulations.
(a) Specific characteristics to be avoided include:
(1) Sources of glare (such as from mirrored or other highly reflective structures or
building features) or bright lights (including search lights and laser light displays);
(2) Distracting lights that could be mistaken for airport lights;
(3) Sources of dust, steam, or smoke that may impair pilots’ vision;
(4) Sources of steam or other emissions that cause thermal plumes or other forms of
unstable air;
requirement. FAA notification requirements apply to all objects including structures, antennas, trees, mobile objects, and
temporary objects such as construction cranes. The FAA will conduct an “Aeronautical Study” of the object(s) and determine
whether the object(s) would be of a height that would constitute a hazard to air navigation. (See Appendix B of this
UKIALUCP for a copy of 14 CFR Part 77 and online procedures for filing Form 7460-1.)
FAA notification is required if the Project contains proposed structures or other objects that exceed the height standards defined
in 14 CFR Part 77, Subpart B. Objects shielded by nearby taller objects are exempted in accordance with 14 CFR Part 77,
Paragraph 77.15. Note that notification to the FAA under 14 CFR Part 77, Subpart B, is required even for certain proposed
construction that does not exceed the height limits allowed by Subpart C of the regulations. Also, the FAA notification area
extends beyond the Airport Influence Area depicted on the Ukiah Municipal Airport Airspace Protection Zones map. Specifically, the
Subpart B notification airspace surface extends outward and upward at a slope of 100:1 for a horizontal distance of 20,000
feet from the nearest point on the runway.
Page 232 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–24 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(5) Sources of electrical interference with aircraft communications or navigation; and
(6) Any proposed use that creates an increased attraction for wildlife and that is
inconsistent with FAA rules and regulations.50 Of particular concern are landfills
and certain recreational or agricultural uses that attract large flocks of bird s that
pose bird strike hazards to aircraft in flight.
(b) The ALUC shall apply applicable Federal Aviation Administration regulations and
guidelines as identified in the Background Information box in this section when
evaluating Projects with regard to these characteristics and shall consult with FAA
officials, the California Division of Aeronautics, and Airport management, as
appropriate. However, a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation by the FAA
does not automatically equate to a Consistency Determination by the ALUC. The FAA
may conclude in its Aeronautical Study that a Project is an Obstruction but not a Hazard
to Air Navigation. However, the ALUC may utilize criteria for protecting aircraft traffic
patterns at the Airport that may differ from the criteria contained in 14 CFR Part 77and
may find a Project inconsistent based on compatibility factors not addressed by an FAA
Aeronautical Study.
50 The FAA rules and regulations include, but are not limited to: Public Law 106-181 (Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment
and Reform Act for the 21st Century, known as AIR 21), Section 503; 40 CFR 258, Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills,
Section 258.10, Airport Safety; Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or N ear Airports; Advisory
Circular 150/5200-34A, Construction or Establishment of Landfills near Public Airports; and any subsequent applicable FAA guid-
ance.
Page 233 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–25
3.7. Overflight Compatibility Policies
OVERFLIGHT COMPATIBILITY POLICIES BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The following Overflight Compatibility Policies Background Information has been considered in formulating the
Overflight Compatibility policies in this section. However, it is provided for informational purposes only and does
not itself constitute UKIALUCP policy. For additional discussion of overflight compatibility concepts, see Appendix
C.
Policy Objective
Noise from individual aircraft operations, especially by comparatively loud aircraft, can be intrusive and annoying
in locations beyond the limits of the noise exposure areas addressed by the policies in Section 3.4. Sensitivity to
aircraft overflight varies from one person to another.
The policies in this Section serve primarily to establish the form and requirements for notification about airport
proximity and aircraft overflight to be given in conjunction with Local Agency approval of new Residential
Development and with certain real estate transactions involving existing Residential land uses. Overflight policies
do not apply to Nonresidential Development.
Measures of Overflight Exposure
The loudness and frequency of occurrence of individual aircraft noise events are key determinants of where
notification of airport proximity and aircraft overflight is warranted. Single -event noise levels are especially
important in areas that are overflown regularly by aircraft, but that do not produce significant CNEL contours.
Locations where aircraft regularly fly at approximately the traffic pattern altitude—1,000 feet above ground level—
or lower are considered to be within the Airport’s overflight impact area. Note that the flight altitude above ground
level will be more or less than this amount depending upon the terrain below. Areas of high terrain beneath the
traffic pattern are exposed to comparatively greater noise levels, a factor that is conside red in the overflight
policies.
Factors Considered in Setting Overflight Compatibility Policies
Factors considered in establishing overflight compatibility policies include the following:
▪ Focus on notification, not restrictions. Unlike the function of the noise, safety, and airspace protection
compatibility policies in this UKIALUCP, overflight compatibility policies do not restrict the manner in which
land can be developed or used. The policies serve only to establish the form and requirements for notification
about airport proximity and aircraft overflights.
▪ Limited applicability to existing development. To be most effective, overflight policies should establish
notification requirements for transactions involving existing residential land uses, not just f uture residential
development. However, the only function of the UKIALUCP with regard to Existing Land Uses is to define the
boundaries within which Airport Proximity Disclosure in conjunction with real estate transactions should be
provided as specified under state law. Other than setting the disclosure boundary, the policies in this Section
apply only to new residential development subject to ALUC review.
▪ State Law. State Airport Proximity Disclosure law applies to existing development, but not to all transactions.
[California state statutes (Business and Professional Code Section 11010 and Civil Code Sections 1102.6,
1103.4, and 1353) require that, as part of many residential real estate transactions, information be disclosed
regarding whether the property is situated within an Airport Influence Area. These state requirements apply to
the sale or lease of newly subdivided lands and condominium conversions and to the sale of certain existing
residential property. In general, Airport Proximity Disclosure is required with existing residential property
transfer only when certain natural conditions (earthquake, fire, or flood hazards) warrant disclosure.]
▪ Need for continuity of notification to future property owners and tenants. To the extent that this UKIALUCP
sets notification requirements for new development, notifications should be in a form that runs with the land
and is provided to prospective future owners and tenants.
▪ To avoid inappropriateness of Avigation Easement dedication solely for buyer awareness purposes. Avigation
Easements involve conveyance of property rights from the property owner to the party owning the easement
and are thus best suited to locations where land use restrictions for noise, safety, or airspace protection
purposes are necessary. Property rights conveyance is not needed for buyer awareness purposes.
Page 234 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–26 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
3.7.1. Recorded Overflight Notification: As a condition for ALUC approval of a proposed residential
land use Project within Compatibility Zone 6, an Overflight Notification shall be recorded in the
chain of title of the property.
(a) The notification shall be of a format similar to that indicated in Appendix G and shall
contain the following language dictated by state law with regard to Airport Proximity
Disclosure in conjunction with real estate transfer:
NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY: This property is presently located in the
vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an Airport Influence Area. For that
reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences
associated with proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration, or
odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to
person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated
with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they
are acceptable to you.
(b) The notification shall be evident to prospective purchasers of the property and shall
appear on the property deed.
(c) A Recorded Overflight Notification is not required where an Avigation Easement dedication is
required as the Avigation Easement accomplishes the notification function (see Policy
3.3.6).
(d) Recording of an Overflight Notification is not required for nonresidential development.
3.7.2. Airport Proximity Disclosure: State law requires that notice disclosing information about the
presence of a nearby airport be given to prospective buyers of certain residential real estate
within an Airport Influence Area. The statutes define an Airport Influence Area as “the area in
which current or future airport-related noise, overflight, safety, or airspace protection
factors may significantly affect land uses or necessitate restrictions on those uses as
determined by an airport land use commission.”51 UKIALUCP criteria with regard to Airport
Proximity Disclosure are as follows:
(a) For existing residences:
(1) Airport Proximity Disclosure as part of real estate transactions involving existing
residences is a matter between private parties. Neither this UKIALUCP nor Local
Agencies have authority to mandate that Airport Proximity Disclosure be provided and
neither the UKIALUCP nor Local Agencies have enforcement responsibilities with
regard to this disclosure.
(2) The sole responsibility of Local Agencies with regard to Airport Proximity Disclosure for
existing residences is to recommend the boundary of the area within which the
disclosure is deemed appropriate and to provide this information to local title
companies and real estate agents. The Airport Influence Area defined herein for Ukiah
Municipal Airport establishes the area in which Airport Proximity Disclosure is
recommended.
(3) Airport Proximity Disclosure should be provided as part of all real estate transactions
(sale, lease, or rental) involving residential property anywhere within the Airport
Influence Area.
51 See California Business and Professions Code Section 11010(b) and Civil Code Section 1353(a).
Page 235 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–27
(b) For proposed residential development:
(1) The disclosure provisions of state law are deemed mandatory for proposed new
residential Projects anywhere within the Airport Influence Area and shall continue in
effect as UKIALUCP criteria even if the state law is made less stringent or
rescinded. The disclosure shall be of a format similar to that indicated in Appendix
G and shall contain the language dictated by state law (see Policy 3.7.1(a)).
(2) Signs providing the notice included in Policy 3.7.1(a) and a map of the Airport
Influence Area shall be prominently posted in the real estate sales office and/or other
key locations of any new residential Project within the Airport Influence Area.
3.8. Exceptions to Land Use Criteria
3.8.1. Rare Special Events Exception: Local Agencies may make exceptions for “Conditional” or
“Incompatible” land uses associated with rare special events (e.g., an air show at the Airport,
a street fair, a golf tournament) for which a facility is not designed and normally not used
and for which extra precautions can be taken as appropriate.
3.8.2. Site-Specific Special Conditions Exception: The policies and criteria set forth in this UKIALUCP
are intended to be applicable to all locations within the Airport Influence Area. However, there
may be specific situations where a normally incompatible use can be considered compatible
because of terrain, specific location, or other extraordinary factors or circumstances related
to the site or Project design. After due consideration of all the factors involved in such
situations and consultation with Airport management, the ALUC may find a normally
incompatible use to be acceptable.
(a) In considering any such exceptions, the ALUC shall take into account the potential for
the use of a building to change over time (see Policy 3.5.4). A building could have
planned low-intensity use initially, but later be converted to a higher-intensity use. Local
Agency permit language or other mechanisms to ensure continued compliance with the
usage Intensity criteria must be put in place.
(b) In considering any such exceptions, the ALUC shall also take into account the need for
special measures to reduce the risks to building occupants in the event that the building
is struck by an aircraft. Building design features include, but are not limited to, the
following:
▪ Using concrete walls;
▪ Limiting the number and size of windows;
▪ Upgrading the strength of the building roof;
▪ Avoiding skylights;
▪ Enhancing the fire sprinkler system;
▪ Limiting buildings to a single story or placing the high-intensity uses on the first
floor to facilitate evacuation of a building if it were to be struck by an aircraft;
and
▪ Increasing the number of emergency exits.
(c) In reaching a decision, the ALUC shall make specific findings as to why the exception
is being made and that the land use will neither create a safety hazard to people on the
ground or aircraft in flight nor result in excessive noise exposure for the proposed use.
Findings also shall be made as to the nature of the extraordinary circumstances that
warrant the policy exception.
Page 236 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–28 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(d) The burden for demonstrating that special conditions apply to a particular development
proposal rests with the project proponent and/or referring Local Agency, not with the
ALUC.
(e) The granting of a special conditions exception shall be considered site specific and shall
not be generalized to include other sites.
3.8.3. Airport-Specific Special Conditions Policies:
(a) Special conditions are acknowledged by the ALUC in the adoption of this UKIALUCP
as follows:
▪ None at this time.
(b) These special conditions result in establishment of Compatibility Zone boundaries and/or
compatibility criteria different in character from the zones and criteria applicable to
other airports in the county. These special policies are not to be generalized or
considered as precedent applicable to other locations near the Airport.
3.9. Review Criteria for Ukiah Municipal Airport Development Actions
3.9.1. Substance of Review: In accordance with state law, any new or amended Ukiah Municipal Airport
master plan or development plan is subject to ALUC review for consistency with the
UKIALUCP (see Policy 1.4.4). In conducting any such review, the ALUC shall evaluate
whether the airport plan would result in greater noise, safety, airspace protection, or
overflight impacts than indicated in this UKIALUCP. Attention should specifically focus
on:
(a) Proposals for facilities or procedures not assumed herein for the Airport, specifically:
(1) Construction of a new runway or helicopter takeoff and landing area.
(2) Change in the length, width, or landing threshold location of an existing runway.
(3) Establishment of an instrument approach procedure that changes the approa ch
capabilities at a particular runway end.
(4) Modification of the flight tracks associated with existing visual or instrument
operations procedures.
(b) Proposed changes in the role or character of use of the Airport.
(c) New activity forecasts that are: (1) significantly higher than those used in developing the
Airport noise contours presented in Chapter 4 or (2) assume a higher proportion of
larger or noisier aircraft.
3.9.2. Noise Impacts of Airport Expansion: Any proposed expansion of Airport facilities52 that would
result in a significant increase in cumulative noise exposure (measured in terms of CNEL)
shall include measures to reduce the exposure to a less-than-significant level. For the
purposes of this UKIALUCP, a noise increase shall be considered significant by the ALUC
if:
(a) In locations having an existing ambient noise level of CNEL 60 dB or less, the
expansion would increase the noise level by 3.0 dB or more.
52 As defined in Public Utilities Code Section 21664.5 and noted in Policy 1.4.3 of Chapter 2.
Page 237 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–29
(b) In locations having an existing ambient noise level of more than CNEL 60 dB, the
expansion would increase the noise level by 1.5 dB or more.
3.9.3. Consistency Determination: The ALUC shall determine whether the proposed Airport plan or
development plan is consistent with this UKIALUCP. The ALUC shall base its
determination of consistency on:
(a) Findings that the development and forecasts identified in the Airport plan would not
result in greater noise, safety, airspace protection, or overflight impacts on surrounding
land uses than are assumed in this UKIALUCP.
(b) Consideration of:
(1) Mitigation measures incorporated into the plan or expansion to reduce any
increases in the noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight impacts to a less-
than-significant level in accordance with provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); or
(2) In instances where the impacts cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level, a
statement of overriding considerations approved by the Local Agency in accordance
with provisions of CEQA.
(c) A determination that any nonaviation development proposed for locations within the
airport boundary (excluding federal, tribal or state-owned property) will be consistent
with the compatibility criteria and policies indicated in this UKIALUCP with respect to
that Airport (see Policy 1.2.12 for definition of aviation-related use).
Page 238 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Table 3A
Basic Compatibility Criteria
3–30 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan ( Adopted May 20, 2021)
Intensity/Density Criteria 1
Airport Influence Area (See Map 3A) 2
Intensity Criteria Interpretation Compatibility Zones Other
Airport
Environs 1 2 3 4 5 6
Max. Sitewide Avg. Intensity (people/acre)
Max. Single-Acre Intensity (people/acre)
0 3
0 3
60
120
100
300
150
450
100
300
300
1,200
no
limit
▪ All nonresidential development must satisfy
both sitewide and single-acre intensity limits
Max. Sitewide Average Density
(dwelling units/acre)
0 0.1
(10-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
1.0 no
limit
no
limit
▪ See Policy 3.5.1(b) for single-acre density
limits
Urban Overlay Zone (dwelling units/acre) 4 15 35 ▪ See Policy 3.2.3(b) for application
Open Land Requirement 5
all
remain’g
25% 15% 15% 25% 15% no
req.
▪ See Policy 3.5.6 for application
▪ Not applicable in Urban Overlay Zone
Land Use Category Legend
(see last page for interpretation) Additional Criteria
▪ Multiple land use categories may apply to
a project
▪ Land uses not specifically listed shall be
evaluated using criteria for similar uses
▪ Typical occupancy Load Factor [approx.
s.f./person] indicated for certain uses 6
Incompatible Conditionally
Compatible
Normally
Compatible
▪ Conditions listed below apply to uses listed as
“Conditional” (yellow) for a particular zone
▪ See Policy 3.3.6 for avigation easement
dedication requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.1 for Recorded Overflight
Notification requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.2 for Airport Proximity
Disclosure requirement
General Characteristics
Any use having structures (including
poles or antennas) or trees 35 feet
or higher
All (except Zone 1): Ensure airspace
obstruction does not occur (see Policy
3.6.1 and Map 3B) 7
Any use having the potential to cause
an increase in the attraction of birds
or other wildlife
4, 5, OAE: Avoid use or provide mitigation
consistent with FAA rules and
regulations 8
Any use creating visual or electronic
hazards to flight OAE: Avoid use or provide mitigation
consistent with FAA rules and regs 9
Outdoor Uses (no or limited indoor
activities)
Natural Land Areas: woods, brush
lands, desert 1-3: Vegetation must be clear of airspace
surfaces
Water: flood plains, wetlands, lakes,
reservoirs, rivers, detention/
retention ponds
All: Avoid new features that attract birds or
provide mitigation consistent with FAA
regulations 8
Agriculture (except residences and
livestock): field crops, orchards,
vineyards, pasture, range land
All: Avoid new features that attract birds or
provide mitigation consistent with FAA
regulations 8
Livestock Uses: feed lots,
stockyards, breeding, fish
hatcheries, horse/riding stables,
poultry and dairy farms
All (except Zone 1): Avoid new features
that attract birds or provide mitigation
consistent with FAA regulations 8;
exercise caution with uses involving
noise-sensitive animals
Outdoor Major Assembly Facilities
(capacity ≥1,000 people):
spectator-oriented outdoor
stadiums, amphitheaters,
fairgrounds, race tracks, water
parks, zoos
6: Allowed only if alternative site outside
zone would not serve intended function;
exercise caution if clear audibility by
users is essential
Page 239 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Table 3A, continued
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–31
Intensity/Density Criteria 1
Airport Influence Area (See Map 3A) 2
Intensity Criteria Interpretation Compatibility Zones Other
Airport
Environs 1 2 3 4 5 6
Max. Sitewide Avg. Intensity (people/acre)
Max. Single-Acre Intensity (people/acre)
0 3
0 3
60
120
100
300
150
450
100
300
300
1,200
no
limit
▪ All nonresidential development must satisfy
both sitewide and single-acre intensity limits
Max. Sitewide Average Density
(dwelling units/acre)
0 0.1
(10-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
1.0 no
limit
no
limit
▪ See Policy 3.5.1(b) for single-acre density
limits
Urban Overlay Zone (dwelling units/acre) 4 15 35 ▪ See Policy 3.2.3(b) for application
Open Land Requirement 5
all
remain’g
25% 15% 15% 25% 15% no
req.
▪ See Policy 3.5.6 for application
▪ Not applicable in Urban Overlay Zone
Land Use Category Legend
(see last page for interpretation) Additional Criteria
▪ Multiple land use categories may apply to
a project
▪ Land uses not specifically listed shall be
evaluated using criteria for similar uses
▪ Typical occupancy Load Factor [approx.
s.f./person] indicated for certain uses 6
Incompatible Conditionally
Compatible
Normally
Compatible
▪ Conditions listed below apply to uses listed as
“Conditional” (yellow) for a particular zone
▪ See Policy 3.3.6 for avigation easement
dedication requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.1 for Recorded Overflight
Notification requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.2 for Airport Proximity
Disclosure requirement
Outdoor Large Assembly Facilities
(capacity 300 to 999 people):
spectator-oriented outdoor
stadiums, amphitheaters
4: Ensure intensity criteria met; exercise
caution if clear audibility by users is
essential
Outdoor Group Recreation (limited
spectator stands): athletic fields,
water recreation facilities
(community pools), picnic areas
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met; not
allowed if intended primarily for use by
children; exercise caution if clear
audibility by users is essential
Outdoor Non-Group Recreation
(small/low-intensity): golf courses
(except clubhouse), tennis courts,
shooting ranges
3, 4: Ensure intensity criteria met; not
allowed if intended primarily for use by
children; exercise caution if clear
audibility by users is essential
Local Parks: neighborhood parks,
playgrounds
2, 3: Must have little or no permanent
facilities where people congregate;
exercise caution if clear audibility by
users is essential
Camping: campgrounds, recreational
vehicle/ motor home parks 4: Ensure intensity criteria met; avoid if
disruption by aircraft noise unacceptable
Cemeteries (except chapels) 2-4: Ensure intensity criteria met; avoid if
disruption by aircraft noise unacceptable
Residential and Lodging Uses
Single-Family Residential: individual
dwellings, townhouses, mobile
homes, bed and breakfast inns
2-5: Ensure density criteria met; limit
clustering 10
2, 4 Locate dwelling max. distance from
extended runway centerline where
feasible
Multi-Family Residential: townhouses,
apartments condominiums 3, 4: Allowed only in Urban Overlay Zone;
ensure density criteria met
Long-Term Lodging (>30 nights):
extended-stay hotels, dormitories
3, 4: Ensure intensity criteria met
Page 240 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
Table 3A, continued
3–32 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Intensity/Density Criteria 1
Airport Influence Area (See Map 3A) 2
Intensity Criteria Interpretation Compatibility Zones Other
Airport
Environs 1 2 3 4 5 6
Max. Sitewide Avg. Intensity (people/acre)
Max. Single-Acre Intensity (people/acre)
0 3
0 3
60
120
100
300
150
450
100
300
300
1,200
no
limit
▪ All nonresidential development must satisfy
both sitewide and single-acre intensity limits
Max. Sitewide Average Density
(dwelling units/acre)
0 0.1
(10-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
1.0 no
limit
no
limit
▪ See Policy 3.5.1(b) for single-acre density
limits
Urban Overlay Zone (dwelling units/acre) 4 15 35 ▪ See Policy 3.2.3(b) for application
Open Land Requirement 5
all
remain’g
25% 15% 15% 25% 15% no
req.
▪ See Policy 3.5.6 for application
▪ Not applicable in Urban Overlay Zone
Land Use Category Legend
(see last page for interpretation) Additional Criteria
▪ Multiple land use categories may apply to
a project
▪ Land uses not specifically listed shall be
evaluated using criteria for similar uses
▪ Typical occupancy Load Factor [approx.
s.f./person] indicated for certain uses 6
Incompatible Conditionally
Compatible
Normally
Compatible
▪ Conditions listed below apply to uses listed as
“Conditional” (yellow) for a particular zone
▪ See Policy 3.3.6 for avigation easement
dedication requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.1 for Recorded Overflight
Notification requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.2 for Airport Proximity
Disclosure requirement
Short-Term Lodging (≤30 nights,
except conference/assembly
facilities): hotels, motels, other
transient lodging
[approx. 200 s.f./person]
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
Congregate Care: retirement homes,
assisted living/residential care
facilities, intermediate care
facilities, emergency/homeless
shelters, group homes (youth/adult)
3, 4: Ensure intensity criteria met
Educational and Institutional Uses
Family day care homes (≤14
children) 10 2-4: CNEL 45 dB max. interior noise level
Children’s Schools: K-12, day care
centers (>14 children), libraries
6: Allowed only if alternative site outside
zone would not serve intended function;
exercise caution if clear audibility by
users is essential
Adult Education classroom space:
adult schools, colleges, universities
[approx. 40 s.f./person]
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
Indoor Major Assembly Facilities
(capacity ≥1,000 people):
auditoriums, conference centers,
resorts, concert halls, indoor
arenas
6: Allowed only if alternative site outside
zone would not serve intended function;
exercise caution if clear audibility by
users is essential
Indoor Large Assembly Facilities
(capacity 300 to 999 people):
movie theaters, places of worship,
cemetery chapels, mortuaries
[approx. 15 s.f./person]
4: Ensure intensity criteria met
Page 241 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Table 3A, continued
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–33
Intensity/Density Criteria 1
Airport Influence Area (See Map 3A) 2
Intensity Criteria Interpretation Compatibility Zones Other
Airport
Environs 1 2 3 4 5 6
Max. Sitewide Avg. Intensity (people/acre)
Max. Single-Acre Intensity (people/acre)
0 3
0 3
60
120
100
300
150
450
100
300
300
1,200
no
limit
▪ All nonresidential development must satisfy
both sitewide and single-acre intensity limits
Max. Sitewide Average Density
(dwelling units/acre)
0 0.1
(10-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
1.0 no
limit
no
limit
▪ See Policy 3.5.1(b) for single-acre density
limits
Urban Overlay Zone (dwelling units/acre) 4 15 35 ▪ See Policy 3.2.3(b) for application
Open Land Requirement 5
all
remain’g
25% 15% 15% 25% 15% no
req.
▪ See Policy 3.5.6 for application
▪ Not applicable in Urban Overlay Zone
Land Use Category Legend
(see last page for interpretation) Additional Criteria
▪ Multiple land use categories may apply to
a project
▪ Land uses not specifically listed shall be
evaluated using criteria for similar uses
▪ Typical occupancy Load Factor [approx.
s.f./person] indicated for certain uses 6
Incompatible Conditionally
Compatible
Normally
Compatible
▪ Conditions listed below apply to uses listed as
“Conditional” (yellow) for a particular zone
▪ See Policy 3.3.6 for avigation easement
dedication requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.1 for Recorded Overflight
Notification requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.2 for Airport Proximity
Disclosure requirement
Indoor Small Assembly Facilities
(capacity <300 people): community
libraries; art galleries; museums;
exhibition space, community/senior
centers
[approx. 60 s.f./person]
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met; not
allowed if intended primarily for use by
children; avoid outdoor spaces intended
for noise-sensitive activities
Indoor Recreation: gymnasiums, club
houses, athletic clubs, dance
studios, sports complexes (indoor
soccer), health clubs, spas
[approx. 60 s.f./person]
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met; not
allowed if intended primarily for use by
children
In-Patient Medical: hospitals, mental
hospitals, nursing homes 3, 4: Ensure intensity criteria met
Out-Patient Medical: health care
centers, clinics
[approx. 240 s.f./person]
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
Penal Institutions: prisons,
reformatories
6: Allowed only if alternative site outside
zone would not serve intended function;
ensure intensity criteria met
Public Safety Facilities: police, fire
stations 3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
Commercial, Office, and Service Uses
Major Retail (capacity >300 people
per building): regional shopping
centers, ‘big box’ retail, super-
market [approx. 110 s.f./person]
4: Ensure intensity criteria met
Local Retail (≤300 people per
building): community/neighborhood
shopping centers, grocery stores
[approx. 170 s.f./person]
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
Eating/Drinking Establishments:
restaurants, bars, fast-food dining
[approx. 60 s.f./person]
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
Page 242 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
Table 3A, continued
3–34 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Intensity/Density Criteria 1
Airport Influence Area (See Map 3A) 2
Intensity Criteria Interpretation Compatibility Zones Other
Airport
Environs 1 2 3 4 5 6
Max. Sitewide Avg. Intensity (people/acre)
Max. Single-Acre Intensity (people/acre)
0 3
0 3
60
120
100
300
150
450
100
300
300
1,200
no
limit
▪ All nonresidential development must satisfy
both sitewide and single-acre intensity limits
Max. Sitewide Average Density
(dwelling units/acre)
0 0.1
(10-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
1.0 no
limit
no
limit
▪ See Policy 3.5.1(b) for single-acre density
limits
Urban Overlay Zone (dwelling units/acre) 4 15 35 ▪ See Policy 3.2.3(b) for application
Open Land Requirement 5
all
remain’g
25% 15% 15% 25% 15% no
req.
▪ See Policy 3.5.6 for application
▪ Not applicable in Urban Overlay Zone
Land Use Category Legend
(see last page for interpretation) Additional Criteria
▪ Multiple land use categories may apply to
a project
▪ Land uses not specifically listed shall be
evaluated using criteria for similar uses
▪ Typical occupancy Load Factor [approx.
s.f./person] indicated for certain uses 6
Incompatible Conditionally
Compatible
Normally
Compatible
▪ Conditions listed below apply to uses listed as
“Conditional” (yellow) for a particular zone
▪ See Policy 3.3.6 for avigation easement
dedication requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.1 for Recorded Overflight
Notification requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.2 for Airport Proximity
Disclosure requirement
Limited Retail/Wholesale: furniture,
automobiles, heavy equipment,
building materials, hardware,
lumber yards, nurseries [approx.
250 s.f./person]
2-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
2: Locate structure max. distance from
extended runway centerline where
feasible
Offices: professional services,
doctors, finance, banks, civic;
radio, television and recording
studios, office space associated
with other listed uses
[approx. 215 s.f./person]
2-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
2: Locate structure max. distance from
extended runway centerline where
feasible
Personal and Miscellaneous
Services: barbers, car washes,
print shops
[approx. 200 s.f./person]
2-5: Ensure intensity criteria met
2: Locate structure max. distance from
extended runway centerline where
feasible
Fueling Facilities: gas stations,
trucking and other transportation
fueling facilities
2-4: Ensure intensity criteria met
2: Store fuel underground or in above-
ground storage tanks with combined
max. capacity of 6,000 gallons; locate
structure max. distance from extended
runway centerline where feasible
Industrial, Manufacturing, and Storage
Uses
Hazardous Materials Production and
Storage (flammable, explosive,
corrosive, or toxic): oil refineries,
chemical plants
6, OAE: Allowed only if alternative site
outside zone would not serve intended
function; generation of steam or thermal
plumes not allowed
Heavy Industrial
6, OAE: Bulk storage of hazardous mate-
rials allowed only for on-site use;
permitting agencies to evaluate possible
need for special measures to minimize
hazards if struck by aircraft; generation
of steam or thermal plumes not allowed
Page 243 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Table 3A, continued
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–35
Intensity/Density Criteria 1
Airport Influence Area (See Map 3A) 2
Intensity Criteria Interpretation Compatibility Zones Other
Airport
Environs 1 2 3 4 5 6
Max. Sitewide Avg. Intensity (people/acre)
Max. Single-Acre Intensity (people/acre)
0 3
0 3
60
120
100
300
150
450
100
300
300
1,200
no
limit
▪ All nonresidential development must satisfy
both sitewide and single-acre intensity limits
Max. Sitewide Average Density
(dwelling units/acre)
0 0.1
(10-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
1.0 no
limit
no
limit
▪ See Policy 3.5.1(b) for single-acre density
limits
Urban Overlay Zone (dwelling units/acre) 4 15 35 ▪ See Policy 3.2.3(b) for application
Open Land Requirement 5
all
remain’g
25% 15% 15% 25% 15% no
req.
▪ See Policy 3.5.6 for application
▪ Not applicable in Urban Overlay Zone
Land Use Category Legend
(see last page for interpretation) Additional Criteria
▪ Multiple land use categories may apply to
a project
▪ Land uses not specifically listed shall be
evaluated using criteria for similar uses
▪ Typical occupancy Load Factor [approx.
s.f./person] indicated for certain uses 6
Incompatible Conditionally
Compatible
Normally
Compatible
▪ Conditions listed below apply to uses listed as
“Conditional” (yellow) for a particular zone
▪ See Policy 3.3.6 for avigation easement
dedication requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.1 for Recorded Overflight
Notification requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.2 for Airport Proximity
Disclosure requirement
Light Industrial, High Intensity: food
products preparation, electronic
equipment, bottling plant
[approx. 200 s.f./person]
3-5: Ensure intensity criteria met; bulk
storage of hazardous (flammable,
explosive, corrosive, or toxic) materials
allowed only for on-site use; permitting
agencies to evaluate possible need for
special measures to minimize hazards if
struck by aircraft
Light Industrial, Low Intensity:
machine shops, wood products,
auto repair
[approx. 350 s.f./person]
2-5: Ensure intensity criteria met; bulk
storage of hazardous (flammable,
explosive, corrosive, or toxic) materials
allowed only for on-site use; permitting
agencies to evaluate possible need for
special measures to minimize hazards if
struck by aircraft
2: Locate structure max. distance from
extended runway centerline where
feasible
Research and Development
Laboratories
[approx. 300 s.f./person]
2-5: Ensure intensity criteria met; bulk
storage of hazardous (flammable,
explosive, corrosive, or toxic) materials
allowed only for on-site use; permitting
agencies to evaluate possible need for
special measures to minimize hazards if
struck by aircraft
2: Locate structure max. distance from
extended runway centerline where
feasible
Indoor Storage: wholesale sales,
distribution centers, warehouses,
mini/other indoor storage, barns,
greenhouses
[approx. 1,000 s.f./person]
2, 3, 5: Ensure intensity criteria met;
ensure airspace obstruction does not
occur
Outdoor Storage: public works yards,
automobile dismantling
1: Not allowed in Zone 1, only in 1*
1*, 2: Ensure intensity criteria are met 3;
ensure airspace obstruction does not
occur
Page 244 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
Table 3A, continued
3–36 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Intensity/Density Criteria 1
Airport Influence Area (See Map 3A) 2
Intensity Criteria Interpretation Compatibility Zones Other
Airport
Environs 1 2 3 4 5 6
Max. Sitewide Avg. Intensity (people/acre)
Max. Single-Acre Intensity (people/acre)
0 3
0 3
60
120
100
300
150
450
100
300
300
1,200
no
limit
▪ All nonresidential development must satisfy
both sitewide and single-acre intensity limits
Max. Sitewide Average Density
(dwelling units/acre)
0 0.1
(10-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
1.0 no
limit
no
limit
▪ See Policy 3.5.1(b) for single-acre density
limits
Urban Overlay Zone (dwelling units/acre) 4 15 35 ▪ See Policy 3.2.3(b) for application
Open Land Requirement 5
all
remain’g
25% 15% 15% 25% 15% no
req.
▪ See Policy 3.5.6 for application
▪ Not applicable in Urban Overlay Zone
Land Use Category Legend
(see last page for interpretation) Additional Criteria
▪ Multiple land use categories may apply to
a project
▪ Land uses not specifically listed shall be
evaluated using criteria for similar uses
▪ Typical occupancy Load Factor [approx.
s.f./person] indicated for certain uses 6
Incompatible Conditionally
Compatible
Normally
Compatible
▪ Conditions listed below apply to uses listed as
“Conditional” (yellow) for a particular zone
▪ See Policy 3.3.6 for avigation easement
dedication requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.1 for Recorded Overflight
Notification requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.2 for Airport Proximity
Disclosure requirement
Mining and Extraction
2-6: Generation of dust clouds, smoke,
steam plumes not allowed; ensure
airspace obstruction does not occur
Transportation, Communication, and
Utilities
Airport Terminals: airline, general
aviation
Transportation Stations: rail/bus
stations; taxi, trucking and other
transportation terminals
2-5: Ensure intensity criteria met; ensure
airspace obstruction does not occur
Transportation Routes: road and rail
transit lines, rights-of-way, bus
stops
2: Avoid road intersections if traffic con-
gestion occurs; ensure airspace
obstruction does not occur
Auto Parking: surface lots, structures
1: Not allowed in Zone 1, only in 1*
1*, 2: Ensure intensity criteria are met 3;
Ensure airspace obstruction does not
occur
Communications Facilities: broadcast
and cell towers, emergency
communications
2- 6: Allowed only if site outside zone
would not serve intended public function;
locate structures max. distance from
extended runway centerline where
feasible; ensure all facilities and
associated power lines meet airspace
protection criteria (height, thermal
plumes, glare, etc.)
Page 245 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Table 3A, continued
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–37
Intensity/Density Criteria 1
Airport Influence Area (See Map 3A) 2
Intensity Criteria Interpretation Compatibility Zones Other
Airport
Environs 1 2 3 4 5 6
Max. Sitewide Avg. Intensity (people/acre)
Max. Single-Acre Intensity (people/acre)
0 3
0 3
60
120
100
300
150
450
100
300
300
1,200
no
limit
▪ All nonresidential development must satisfy
both sitewide and single-acre intensity limits
Max. Sitewide Average Density
(dwelling units/acre)
0 0.1
(10-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
0.5
(2-ac. lot)
1.0 no
limit
no
limit
▪ See Policy 3.5.1(b) for single-acre density
limits
Urban Overlay Zone (dwelling units/acre) 4 15 35 ▪ See Policy 3.2.3(b) for application
Open Land Requirement 5
all
remain’g
25% 15% 15% 25% 15% no
req.
▪ See Policy 3.5.6 for application
▪ Not applicable in Urban Overlay Zone
Land Use Category Legend
(see last page for interpretation) Additional Criteria
▪ Multiple land use categories may apply to
a project
▪ Land uses not specifically listed shall be
evaluated using criteria for similar uses
▪ Typical occupancy Load Factor [approx.
s.f./person] indicated for certain uses 6
Incompatible Conditionally
Compatible
Normally
Compatible
▪ Conditions listed below apply to uses listed as
“Conditional” (yellow) for a particular zone
▪ See Policy 3.3.6 for avigation easement
dedication requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.1 for Recorded Overflight
Notification requirements
▪ See Policy 3.7.2 for Airport Proximity
Disclosure requirement
Power Plants: primary, peaker,
renewable energy, bio-energy
4, 5: Primary plants not allowed; peaker
and renewable energy plants allowed
only if site outside zone would not serve
intended public function; ensure all
facilities and associated power lines
meet airspace protection criteria (height,
thermal plumes, glare, etc.)
4: Locate structures max. distance from
extended runway centerline
6: Primary plants allowed only if site
outside zone would not serve intended
public function
Electrical Substations
3-5: Allowed only if site outside zone
would not serve intended public function
4: Locate structures max. distance from
extended runway centerline where
feasible
Wastewater Facilities: treatment,
disposal
3, 4, 6, OAE: Allowed only if site outside
zone would not serve intended public
function; avoid new features that attract
birds or provide mitigation consistent
with FAA regulations 8
Solid Waste Disposal Facilities:
landfill, incineration
3, 4, 6, OAE: Allowed only if site outside
zone would not serve intended public
function; avoid new features that attract
birds or provide mitigation consistent
with FAA regulations 8
Solid Waste Transfer Facilities,
Recycle Centers
3, 4, 6: Allowed only if site outside zone
would not serve intended public function;
avoid new features that attract birds or
provide mitigation consistent with FAA
regulations 8
Page 246 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
Table 3A, continued
3–38 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Land Use Acceptability Interpretation/Comments
Normally
Compatible
Normal examples of the use are compatible with noise, safety, and airspace protection criteria.
Atypical examples may require review to ensure compliance with usage intensity, lot coverage,
and height limit criteria.
Conditional
Use is compatible if indicated usage intensity, lot coverage, and other listed conditions are met.
For the purposes of these criteria, “avoid” is intended as cautionary guidance, not a prohibition
of the use.
Generally
Incompatible Use should not be permitted under any circumstances.
Page 247 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Table 3A, continued
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–39
Notes
Indicates land use that is or may be highly noise sensitive. Exercise caution with regard to approval of outdoor uses —evaluate
potential for aircraft noise to disrupt the activity. Indoor uses may require addition of sound attenuation to structure. See Section 3.3 for
criteria.
Indicates land use that may attract birds, generate dust, produce smoke or steam plumes, create electronic interference, or otherwise
pose hazards to flight. See Section 3.5 for criteria.
1 Residential and nonresidential uses must comply with both the “sitewide average” and “single-acre” Density and Intensity limits
indicated for the Compatibility Zone(s) in which the Project is located (see Section 3.5). Density and Intensity criteria apply to all uses
including ones shown as “Normally Compatible” (green) and “Conditional” (yellow). Density is measured in terms of number of dwelling
units per acre. Usage Intensity calculations shall include all people (e.g., employees, customers/visitors) who may be on the property at
any single point in time during typical busy periods, whether indoors or outdoors (see Policy 3.2.6). Exceptions can be made for Rare
Special Events (e.g., an air show at the airport, street fair) for which a facility is not designed and normally not used and for which extra
safety precautions can be taken as appropriate (see Policy 3.8.1). The usage Intensities shall be calculated in accordance with the
methodologies cited in Policy 3.5.3.
2 Airport Influence Area (also referred to as the Referral Area) includes the area shown in Map 3A, in which current or future airport-
related noise, overflight, safety, or airspace protection factors may significantly affect land uses or necessitate restricti ons on those
uses. The Airport Influence Area includes Compatibility Zones 1 through 6 plus the Other Airport Environs areas underlying the
Airspace Protection Surfaces shown in Map 3B.
3 Within Compatibility Zone 1*, sitewide average and single-acre intensities of up to 10 people per acre shall be allowed. See Policy
3.2.3(c).
4 Urban Overlay Zone covering portions of Compatibility Zones 3 and 4 provides exceptions to the indicated basic density criteria to
reflect existing land use patterns and allow multifamily residential uses (see Policy 3.2.3(b)).
5 Open land requirements are intended to be applied with respect to an entire zone (see Policy 3.5.6). This is typically accomplished as
part of a local general plan or specific plan but may also apply to large (10 acres or more) development Projects. Providing open land is
not required in the Urban Overlay Zone.
6 Occupancy Load Factors [approximate number of square feet per person] cited for many listed land use categories are based on
information from various sources and are intended to represent “typical busy-period” usage (or “peak” usage) for typical examples of
the land use category. These Occupancy Load Factors differ from those provided in the California Building Code (CBC), as the CBC
considers the absolute maximum number of people that can be safely accommodated in a building. See Policy 3.5.3.
7 The 35-foot height criterion is an evaluation threshold. Objects shorter than 35 feet do not pose airspace protection issues in these
zones. Objects 35 feet high or taller should be evaluated to ensure compliance with airspace protection criteria.
8 No proposed Project shall be allowed that would create an increased attraction for wildlife and that is inconsistent with FAA rules and
regulations including, but not limited to, FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants On or Near Airports and
Advisory Circular 150/5200-34A, Construction or Establishment of Landfills near Public Airports. Of particular concern are landfills and
certain recreational or agricultural uses that attract large flocks of birds that pose bird strike hazards to aircraft in flight. See Policy
3.6.4.
9 Specific characteristics to be avoided include: sources of glare (such as from mirrored or other highly reflective structures or building
features) or bright lights (including search lights and laser light displays); distracting lights that could be mistaken for airport lights;
sources of dust, steam, or smoke that may impair pilots’ vision; sources of steam or other emissions that cause thermal plumes or other
forms of unstable air; and sources of electrical interference with aircraft communications or navigation. See Policy 3.6.4.
10 Clustering of residential development is permitted. However, no single acre of a project site shall exceed 1.5 times the average allowed
Density for the respective zone, including the Urban Overlay Zone. See Policy 3.5.1.
11 Family day care home means a home that regularly provides care, protection, and supervision for 14 or fewer children , in the provider’s
own home, for periods of less than 24 hours per day. Small family day care homes provide care for eight or fewer children and large
family day care homes provide care for 7 to 14 children (Health and Safety Code Section 1596.78).
Page 248 of 550
CHAPTER 4 AIRPORT -SPECIFIC COMPATIBILITY POLICIES AND MAPS
4–40 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This page intentionally blank
Page 249 of 550
COMPATIBILITY POLICIES CHAPTER 3
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 3–41
Table 3B
Compatibility Zone Delineation
Zone Noise and Overflight Factors Safety and Airspace Protection Factors
1 and 1*
Runway
Protection
Zone
Noise Impact: Very High
▪ Mostly above CNEL 60 dB, particularly
when Cal Fire aircraft operate
Risk Level: Very High
▪ Defined by Handbook Safety Zone 1 as modified to reflect
Runway Protection Zones (RPZs) from 2016 Airport Layout
Plan (ALP)
▪ UKIALUCP Zone 1* encompasses RPZs for 5,000-foot run-
way
▪ Aircraft on very close final approach or departure; nearly
20% of near-runway general aviation accidents occur in this
zone
▪ Aircraft at altitudes of less than 200 feet above runway
▪ Object heights restricted to <35 feet in some areas
2
Inner
Approach/
Departure
Zone
Noise Impact: High
▪ Typically above CNEL 60 dB, particu-
larly when Cal Fire aircraft operate
▪ Single-event noise sufficient to disrupt a
wide range of land use activities includ-
ing indoors if windows open
Risk Level: High
▪ Define by Handbook Safety Zone 2 for existing runway con-
figuration
▪ Aircraft overflying at low altitudes on final approach and
straight-out departures—typically only 200 to 400 feet
above the runway elevation
▪ Some 8% to 22% of near-runway general aviation acci-
dents occur in this zone
▪ Object heights restricted to <35 feet in some areas
3
Inner
Turning
Zone
Noise Impact: Moderate
▪ May exceed CNEL 55 dB, particularly
when Cal Fire aircraft operate
▪ Single-event noise sufficient to disrupt
noise-sensitive land uses
Risk Level: Moderate to High
▪ Defined by Handbook Safety Zone 3
▪ Aircraft—especially smaller, piston-powered aircraft—turn-
ing base to final on landing approach or initiating turn to en
route direction on departure; aircraft altitude typically less
than 500 feet above runway, particularly on landing
▪ About 4% to 8% of near-runway general aviation accidents
occur in this zone
▪ Object heights restricted to <35 feet in some areas
4
Extended
Approach/
Departure
Zone
Noise Impact: Moderate
▪ May exceed CNEL 55 dB, particularly
when Cal Fire aircraft operate
▪ Single-event noise sufficient to disrupt
noise-sensitive land uses
Risk Level: Moderate
▪ Define by Handbook Safety Zone 4 and northerly portion of
Safety Zone 2 for future runway configuration
▪ Aircraft on approach typically less than traffic pattern alti-
tude (less than 1,000 feet above runway)
▪ About 2% to 6% of near-runway general aviation accidents
occur in this zone
▪ Object heights restricted to <100 feet in some areas
5
Sideline
Zone
Noise Impact: Moderate to High
▪ Mostly above CNEL 55 dB
▪ Single-event noise sufficient to disrupt
noise-sensitive land uses
Risk Level: Low to Moderate
▪ Defined by Handbook Safety Zone 5
▪ Area not normally overflown; primary risk is with aircraft
(especially twins) losing directional control on takeoff, ex-
cessive crossing gusts or engine torque
▪ About 3% to 5% of near-runway general aviation accidents
occur in this zone
▪ Object heights restricted to <35 feet in some areas
6
Traffic Pattern
Zone
Noise Impact: Low
▪ Typically below CNEL 55 dB
▪ Aircraft typically at or below 1,000-foot
traffic pattern altitude
▪ Noise more of a concern with respect to
individual loud events than with cumula-
tive noise contours; frequent individual
noise events sufficient to intrude upon
indoor activities
Risk Level: Low
▪ Defined by Handbook Safety Zone 6
▪ Includes areas within the standard traffic pattern and pat-
tern entry routes; aircraft altitude typically 1,000 to 1,500
feet above runway
▪ Risk is a factor for highly risk-sensitive uses (e.g., very
high-intensity uses, children’s schools, hospitals, bulk stor-
age of highly hazardous materials)
▪ Some 18% to 29% of near-runway general aviation acci-
dents occur here; but the large area encompassed means
a low likelihood of accident occurrence in any given loca-
tion
▪ Airspace concern is generally with object heights >100 feet
above runway elevation
Page 250 of 550
CHAPTER 3 COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
3–42 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Table 3B (Continued)
Compatibility Zone Factors
Zone Noise and Overflight Factors Safety and Airspace Protection Factors
OAE
Other Airport
Environs
Zone
Noise Impact: Low
▪ Beyond the 55-CNEL contour
▪ Occasional overflights intrusive to some
outdoor activities
Risk Level: Low
▪ Includes remainder of area within the CFR Part 77 coni-
cal surface which defines the Airport Influence Area
▪ Airspace concern is generally with object heights >100
feet above runway elevation
UO
Urban
Overlay
Zone
Noise Impact: Low
▪ Beyond the 55-CNEL contour
▪ Reflects relatively high ambient noise
level of urbanized area
Risk Level: Moderate
▪ Includes Zones 3 and 4 to north (within City of Ukiah) and
Zone 3 to southwest (within unincorporated Mendocino
County)
▪ Risk concern is primarily with uses for which potential
consequences are severe (e.g. very-high-intensity activi-
ties in a confined area)
▪ Object heights restricted to <35 feet in some areas
ACP
Airspace
Critical
Protection
Zone
Noise Impact: Low
▪ Individual noise events slightly louder be-
cause high terrain reduces altitude of
overflights
Risk Level: Moderate to High
▪ Modest risk because high terrain constitutes airspace ob-
struction
▪ Key concern is tall single objects (e.g., antennas)
AHT
Airspace
High Terrain
Zone
Noise Impact: Low
▪ Individual noise events slightly louder be-
cause high terrain reduces altitude of
overflights
Risk Level: Moderate
▪ Modest risk because high terrain constitutes airspace ob-
struction
▪ Key concern is tall single objects (e.g., antennas)
Notes:
1. Handbook Safety Zone Source: California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (2011).
Page 251 of 550
55
1
23 3
3 3
4
2
4 6
6
6
Boonville
Ukiah Rd.
Ukiah
3 3
1 5
6
6
6
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
G o b b i S t .
Low Gap Rd.
Vichy Springs Rd.
Talmage Rd.
Eastside Rd.
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Hastings Ave.
Gobalet St.
D
o
r
a
S
t
.
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
P
a
r
k
B
l
v
d
.
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
.
Ukiah
1*
1*
Compatibili ty Zones
Zone 1: Runway Protection Zo ne (RPZ )
Zone 1*: U ltim ate Ru nway P rotection Zone (R PZ)
Zone 2: Inner Aprroach/Departure Zone
Zone 3: Inner Turn ing Zone
Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5: Side line Zone
Zone 6: Traffic Patte rn Zone
Urban Overlay Zone
Other Airport Environs
Source: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
CHAPTER 3COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
0 4,000 8,000Feet
F
Notes
1. All Co mp atibility Zon es: Reflect sa fety zo nes for aGeneral Aviation Runwa y with Single-Sided Tra fficPattern provide d in the 20 11 C alifornia Airpo rt Land Use Planning Handb ook (H andbo ok).
Zone 1: Base d o n the Run way Protection Zo nes(R PZs) pro vided in City and FAA app roved Airp ort Layout Plan (2 016).
Zone 1* reflects an ultima teRunway Prote ctio n Zone (RPZ) for a n u ltimaterunway leng th of 5 ,00 0 feet to serve fu ture ope rationsby Ca lFire L ockh eed C-130 aircra ft.
Zones 2 and 4 (north): Zo ne 2 re fle cts Handb ookSafety Zone 2 for e xistin g R unway 15 end . Zon e 4includes ou ter portion s of H andbo ok Safety Zone 2 fo rfuture Runw ay 15 en d. Futu re n orthe rly run wayextension is intended to provide ad ditiona l ru nway leng thfor depa rtures to sou th; land ing th reshold at Runwa y 15end will remain in its current p osition.
Zones 2 – 4 (sou th): O ffset by 5 -d egrees to reflectsouthern flight rou te whe re a ircra ft u se H ighwa y 101 as a lan dmark
Urb an Overla y Zo ne: Provid es a de nsity increa sewithin Zo nes 3 an d 4 to North a nd Zon e 3 to So uth westto reflect existing land use patte rn s.
Map 3A
Compatibility Policy MapUkiah M unicipal Airport
Mendocino CountyAirport Land Use Commission
(Adopted May 20, 2021)
Ukiah Municipal AirportLand Use Compatibility Plan
Legend
Existing Runway (4,423' Ex. Length)
Future Runway Extension (4,888' Fut. Length)
Existing Airport Property Boundary
City Limit Boundary
!
!!
!
!!
City Sphere of Influence (extends off map view)
Airport Influence Area
N o r g a r d L n .
Hwy. 101
Page 252 of 550
Page 253 of 550
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
G o b b i S t .
Low Gap Rd.
Vichy Springs R d.
Talmage Rd.
Eastside Rd.
Boonville
Ukiah Rd.
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Ukiah
Horizontal SurfaceElevation 768'(150' Above AirportElevation of 618')20:1Conical Surface7:1 TransitionalSurface, Typ.
20:1 ApproachSurface
34:1 ApproachSurface
968'918'
868'818'768'
7 6 8 '
7 1 8 '
6 6 8 '
3 3
1 5
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Ukiah
Legend
Existing R unw ay (4,42 3' Ex. Le ng th )
Fu tu re Run way Exten sion (4 ,8 88' Fut. L eng th )
Existing Airp ort Pro pe rty Bou nda ry
City Limit Bou nda ry
!
!!
!
!!
City Sphe re of Influ en ce (extend s o ff map view )
Airpo rt Influe nce Area
Map 3B
Source: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
CHAPTER 3COMPATIBILITY POLICIES
0 4,000 8,000Feet
F
Airspace Obstruction Surfaces
Airspace Pro tection Zones
Airspace Pro tection Surface C ontour (50' interval)
Airspace Critical P rotection Zone
Airspace High Terrain Zone
Notes1. Source: Title 14 Code of Federal Regulation Part 77, Safe,Efficient Use and Preservation of N avigableAirspace as applied to Ukiah Municipal Airport futurerunway length.
(Adopted May 20, 2021)
Ukiah Municipal AirportLand Use Compatibility Plan
1
Mendocino CountyAirport Land Use Commission
Airspace Protection ZonesUkiah M unicipal Airport
Page 254 of 550
Page 255 of 550
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
CHAPTER 4
BACKGROUND DATA
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Page 256 of 550
Page 257 of 550
4
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 4–1
Background Data:
Ukiah Municipal Airport and Environs
I NTRODUCTION
Ukiah Municipal Airport is owned and operated by the City of Ukiah and is located within the southern
part of the city limits approximately 0.3 miles west of State Highway 101. Ukiah is situated within the
southeastern corner of Mendocino County and is surrounded by hills to the west and south, Lake
Mendocino to the northeast, and the Mayacamas Mountains to the east.
Land uses near the airport are low-to-moderate-density urban to the north and west as well as immediately
to the east between the airport and highway. The city center is located to the north of the airport. The
areas south and east are mostly in unincorporated Mendocino County and dedicated to agriculture and
commercial development. The City’s sphere of influence shows future annexation to the north and west.
Construction of the Ukiah Municipal Airport began in 1942 and included a single 4,000-foot by 150-foot
runway and a 50-foot-wide parallel taxiway. In 1954, the runway was extended to 5,000 feet. In 1986, the
Runway 15 threshold was relocated southward to meet Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
requirements. The current length of the runway is 4,423 feet. Runway 15 is served with a straight-in, non-
precision instrument approach procedure. Runway 33 is served with circle-to-land procedures. The
airport presently occupies 160 acres.
Available information suggests that the southward shift of the approach end of Runway 15 was done to
provide standard approach surface clearances over the adjacent street (Hastings Avenue). The abandoned
portion of the runway was converted to an aligned taxiway. It is unclear why a displaced threshold was
not used. In 2015, a planning effort was undertaken to update the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) in advance
of a runway pavement rehabilitation project. As part of that ALP, the FAA requested a modification to
the aligned taxiway leading to the Runway 15 approach end. The accepted solution was to plan for an
eventual shift of the runway end 465 feet to the north utilizing a displaced landing threshold, situated
where the current runway end is established, to maintain required clearances over Hastings Avenue. In
2016, the FAA approved and the City of Ukiah adopted the ALP with the proposed 465-foot northerly
extension to Runway 15-33. The 2016 approved ALP depicts a future runway length of 4,888 feet and a
runway width reduced from 150 feet to 75 feet in accordance with current FAA standards. The Caltrans
Division of Aeronautics accepted the ALP in May 2019 as the basis of this UKIALUCP.
Page 258 of 550
CHAPTER 4 BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
4–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
As shown on the ALP, this proposed extension results in a future Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) that
extends farther to the north than the existing RPZ. Given the trapezoidal shape of the RPZ, the existing
RPZ encompasses narrow strips of land outside the edges of the future RPZ. The Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) compatibility zones protect both the existing and future Ukiah Municipal
Airport RPZs. At such time as the runway extension has been constructed and the “future” RPZ becomes
the “existing” RPZ, the present RPZ can be eliminated from the UKIALUCP.
In November 2020, the Ukiah City Council approved a recommendation to the ALUC that the
UKIALUCP protect for an ultimate 5,000-foot runway to accommodate operations by CalFire Lockheed
C-130 fire attack aircraft. The City’s recommendation is reflected in the compatibility map and criteria
contained in Chapter 3 of this UKIALUCP by addition of a Compatibility Zone 1* beyond Zone 1 at
each end of the runway. Inclusion of a Compatibility Zone 1* at both runway ends rather than just one
preserves the option for the additional runway length to be provided on either the north or the south.
Each of the 1* zones encompasses the outer 112 feet of the RPZ associated with a 5,000 -foot runway
length extended in one direction or the other.
Although this runway length is not specifically depicted in the 2016 ALP, the drawing indicates that City
either owns outright or controls avigation easements on the lands that would be within an ultimate RPZ
at either end of the runway. Also, land uses within these areas have been restricted under the 1996 ACLUP
for the airport where they are shown as lying within Zone A*. The 2021 UKIALUCP brings forward the
1996 criteria only to the areas that would be within the shifted RPZs, not the remainder of the former
Zone A* areas.
Besides the RPZ, the proposed extension also impacts other aeronautical factors, specifically airspace
protection and noise, that directly affects this UKIALUCP. The shifted runway end will change the future
location of Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part 77 Airspace Protection Surfaces. This change is
reflected in the 2016 ALP drawing set and is brought forward into this UKIALUCP along with the
surfaces associated with the existing runway configuration. The outermost boundary of the Part 77
surfaces for the 4,888-foot runway length comprises the Airport Influence Area shown in Chapter 3 and
in this chapter’s maps. Use of the surfaces associated with a 5,000-foot runway would have insignificant
effect on allowable heights of objects near the airport other than potentially within Compatibility Zones
1 and 1*.
Noise contours also differ slightly between the current and 4,888-foot runway configurations. With the
future runway end shift, aircraft will begin their takeoff roll on Runway 15 farther north. This slightly
increases noise impacts behind the aircraft to the north and reduces the impact beyond the departure end
of the runway to the south. Because the Runway 15 landing threshold will remain in the same place as it
now is, noise impacts of aircraft landing from the north on Runway 15 will not change. The impacts of
aircraft taking off toward the north on Runway 33 will also not be affected. Given that the slight increase
in noise impacts is to the north where land use development is greater than to the south, the noise
contours utilized in this UKIALUCP and shown in Exhibit 4-4 reflect the 4,888-foot runway
configuration. The noise impacts associated with a 5,000-foot runway would differ very little from those
of the 4,888-foot length if the same mix of aircraft is assumed. Use of the C-130 may somewhat expand
the noise contours, but this could be counterbalanced if fewer operations are needed because of the
greater fire retardant capacity of these aircraft compared to the current S-2T fleet.
Additional changes proposed on the 2016 ALP include a fee simple land acquisition of approximately 1.4
acres and avigation easement acquisition of 4.2 acres of land to the north of the runway. These
acquisitions will occur in the future and protect the area for the northerly runway extension.
Page 259 of 550
BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS CHAPTER 4
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 4–3
The airport is a non-towered general aviation facility; therefore, precise operational statistics are not
available. Data on current activity levels, fleet mix, and flight patterns were established through
conversations with airport management. Discussions with airport management indicate that operations
can vary greatly day-to-day, dependent on the season. The airport serves as a CalFire Air Attack Base.
Throughout fire season, CalFire uses the airport to assist in battling wild and forest fires in the region.
The airport is also used for flight training in the area, which is most active during the summer months.
This UKIALUCP takes into account potential long-term growth in airport activity as well as the noise
impacts associated with busy fire attack aircraft activity.
The following exhibits illustrate the compatibility factors and background information that serve as the
basis for this Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
▪ Exhibit 4-1: Airport Features Summary. Presents information pertaining to the airport
configuration, operational characteristics, and applicable planning documents.
▪ Exhibit 4-2: Airport Layout Plan. The 2016 FAA-approved ALP, which was accepted by the
Caltrans Division of Aeronautics as the basis of this UKIALUCP in May 2019, depicts the existing
and proposed future configuration of the airfield and airport building areas. It reflects proposed
future aviation compatible commercial and industrial areas as well as non-aviation commercial areas.
Proposed facility improvements include a proposed tiedown apron, fuel farm, box hangars, and
helicopter parking spaces.
▪ Exhibit 4-3: Airport Activity Data Summary. This table summarizes existing and forecast airport
activity data. Airport records indicate approximately 15,458 annual operations and 78 based aircraft
as of April 2019. The 2016 ALP effort did not include an update to aviation activity forecasts. The
15,458 annual operations count has been provided and confirmed by Ukiah Airport Mana gement.
This UKIALUCP assumes 30,916 annual operations at the end of the 20-year planning period. This
represents a theoretical maximum for compatibility planning purposes.
▪ Exhibit 4-4 through 4-7: Compatibility Factors. Depicts the extents of the four compatibility
factors upon which the Compatibility Zones for Ukiah Municipal Airport were derived. The four
compatibility factors are defined by:
▫ Noise – Future noise contours reflecting an aircraft activity forecast level of 30,916 annual
operations. The Compatibility Zones also consider the CalFire noise contours representing a typical
fire event day with 44 departures and 44 arrivals split evenly between Runways 15 and 33. The
aircraft type modeled is the Grumman S-2 Tracker (S-2T).
▫ Safety – Generic safety zones provided in the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
(October 2011) are applied to the existing and future runway configurations in the following
manner:
· Runway 15/33: Safety zones for a medium general aviation runway (length 4,000 feet to 5,999
feet) are applied to the existing (4,423-foot) and future (4,888-foot) runway configurations.
· North Side Traffic Pattern: Although a future northerly extension of Runway 15 is proposed in
the 2016 ALP, the landing threshold will be conterminous with the existing runway end. As
such, Zone 2 is based on the existing runway configuration. Zone 4 is enlarged to include the
northly portion of Zone 2 for the future runway configuration.
· East Side Traffic Pattern: Consistent with state guidance, safety zones on the west side of the
airport have been adjusted to reflect the airport’s single-sided traffic pattern on the east side of
Page 260 of 550
CHAPTER 4 BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
4–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
the airport, which is necessitated by high terrain located to the west. Accordingly, Zone 3 is
truncated, and Zone 6 is omitted.
· Southern Traffic Pattern: Safety zones south of the approach end of Runway 33 are angled 5
degrees to the east to reflect the common practice used by pilots whereby pilots align with
Highway 101 when departing to the south or on approach to Runway 33.
▫ Overflight – Primary traffic patterns reflecting where aircraft operating at the airport routinely fly.
▫ Airspace Protection – Outer boundary of the Obstruction Surfaces as defined by Code of Federal
Regulation (CFR) Part 77, Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace. Surfaces
associated with both the existing and future 4,888-foot runway configurations are depicted. The
surfaces for an ultimate 5,000-foot runway are not shown.
▪ Exhibit 4-8: Airport Environs Information. Summarizes information about current land uses in
the environs of the Ukiah Municipal Airport. The status of local general plans and airport land use
compatibility policies contained in those plans are also summarized.
▪ Exhibit 4-9: County of Mendocino General Plan Land Uses. Shows the planned land use
designations as reflected in the Mendocino County General Plan (adopted August 2009).
▪ Exhibit 4-10: City of Ukiah General Land Uses. Shows planned land use designations as reflected
in the Ukiah Valley General Plan and Growth Management Program (adopted December 6, 1995).
Page 261 of 550
BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS CHAPTER 4
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 4–5
Exhibit 4-1
Airport Features Summary
Ukiah Municipal Airport
GENERAL INFORMATION
▪ Airport Ownership: City of Ukiah
▪ Property Size: 160 acres
▪ Airport Classification: General Aviation, regional use
▪ Airport Elevation: 616.8 MSL
AIRPORT PLANNING DOCUMENTS
▪ Airport Master Plan (July 1996)
▪ Airport Layout Plan (April 2015; FAA approval January
2016)
RUNWAY/TAXIWAY DESIGN
Runway 15/33
▪ Critical Aircraft: Beech King Air 200
▪ Airport Category/Design Group: Airport Reference Code
B-II
▪ Dimensions: 4,423 ft. long, 150 feet wide
▪ Pavement Strength (main landing gear configuration)
▫ Single wheel: 28,000 lbs
▪ Average Gradient: 0.3% (rising to north)
▪ Runway Lighting: MIRL
▫ Runway 15/33: REIL & VASI
▫ Runway 15: REIL Runway 33
▪ Primary Taxiways: 50-foot wide parallel taxiway
APPROACH PROTECTION
▪ Runway Protection Zones (RPZs)
▫ Runway 15: 500 ft. x 700 ft. x 1,000 ft.
▫ Runway 33: 500 ft. x 700 ft. x 1,000 ft.
▪ Approach Obstacles
▫ Runway 15: 27 ft. trees, 950 ft from runway, 190 ft.
right of centerline, 27:1 slope to clear
▫ Runway 33: 27 ft. trees, 700 ft. from runway, 135 ft.
left of centerline, 18:1 slope to clear
TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND APPROACH PROCEDURES
▪ Airplane Traffic Patterns
▫ Left traffic on Runway 15; right traffic on Runway 33
▫ Pattern altitude: 800 feet AGL
▪ Instrument Approach Procedures
▫ Runway 15 LOC (nonprecision):
Straight-in: 1 1/4 mile visibility, 1,800 ft. min. descent
ht.
Missed approach turns east
Circling (1 1/4 mi. visibility, 1,800 ft. min. descent
height)
▫ Runway 33 VOR (nonprecision):
Approach course from southeast (022°)
Circling: 1 1/4 mile visibility, 2,800 ft. min. descent
ht.
▫ Runway 33 RNAV (GPS):
Approach course from south
Circling: 1 ¼ mile visibility, 2,000 ft. min descent ht.
▪ Visual Approach Aids
▫ Airport: Beacon
▫ Runway 15: VASI 4L, REIL
▫ Runway 33: REIL
▪ Other
▫ CalFire Air Attack/Helitack Base located on Airport
property.
BUILDING AREA
▪ Location
▫ Most facilities west of Runway 15/33
▪ Aircraft Parking Capacity
▫ Four primary tie-down areas; 65 spaces
▫ Two T-hangar buildings; appx. 20 aircraft
▫ One shade hangar; 14 aircraft
▫ One primary auto parking area; appx. 75 spaces
▪ Other Major Facilities
▫ City limits are predominately to the northwest
▫ South and east area is dedicated to agriculture and
commercial development
▫ Highway 101 less than one mile to the east of the
airport
▪ Services
▫ Airport has one fixed base operator (City of Ukiah)
▫ Aviation gasoline (self-service available)
▫ 100LL and Jet A
▫ Aircraft rental; flight instruction; pilot supplies
PLANNED FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
▪ Airfield
▫ Extend runway 465 feet to north to 4,888 feet
▫ Acquire Fee Simple of 6.7 acres
▫ Acquire Avigation Easement of 1.5 acres
▫ Preserve option of extending runway to 5,000 feet
▪ Building Area
▫ Tiedown Apron
▫ Fuel Farm
▫ Wash Rack
▫ PAPI
▫ Box Hangars
▫ Helicopter Parking Spaces
▪ Approach Protection
▫ None
Notes
Sources: Data Compiled by Mead & Hunt (March 2019); Airport Layout Plan (1996), FAA 5010, AIRNAV, City of Ukiah.
Page 262 of 550
CHAPTER 4 BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
4–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This page left intentionally blank
Page 263 of 550
BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS CHAPTER 4
Exhibit 4-2
C:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
8
7
0
t
m
e
\
a
p
p
d
a
t
a
\
l
o
c
a
l
\
t
e
m
p
\
A
c
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
_
7
9
4
8
\
U
K
I
-
a
i
r
p
o
r
t
-
l
a
y
o
u
t
-
E
x
h
4
-
2
.
d
w
g
M
a
y
3
0
,
2
0
1
9
-
2
:
4
9
p
m
Prepared By: www.meadhunt.com
Accepted by Caltrans Division of Aeronautics as
basis of ALUCP on 5/23/19
Page 264 of 550
Page 265 of 550
BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS CHAPTER 4
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 4–7
Exhibit 4-3
Airport Activity Data Summary
Ukiah Municipal Airport
BASED AIRCRAFT
Current c Future a
2019 2039
Aircraft Type
Single-Engine 70 70
Multi-Engine 2 2
Jet 0 0
Helicopters 2 2
Gliders 1 1
Military 0 0
Ultra-Light 3 4
Total 78 79
AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Current c Future a
2019 2039
Total
Annual 15,458 30,916
Average Day, Annual 42 85
Distribution by Operation Type c
Local (incl. touch-and-goes) 38% No
Itinerant 62% Change
Distribution by Aircraft Type a
General Aviation
Single-Engine Piston 77%
Single-Engine Turbine 9%
Twin-Engine Piston 1%
Jet <1% No
Helicopter 6% Change
Gliders <1%
Military <1%
Ultra-Light <1%
Fire Attack 6%
RUNWAY USE DISTRIBUTION
Current Future
Takeoffs & Landings
Single-Engine Aircraft
Runway 15 50% 50%
Runway 33 50% 50%
Twin-Engine & Business Jet Aircraft
Runway 15 50% 50%
Runway 33 50% 50%
TIME OF DAY DISTRIBUTION
Day Evening Night
Single-Engine Aircraft 95% 4% 1%
Twin-Engine Aircraft & 95% 4% 1%
Business Jet Aircraft
FLIGHT TRACK USAGE b
All Aircraft
▪ Left traffic on Runway 15; right traffic on Runway
33
▪ Noise abatement departure procedure in effect
for departures on Runway 33
Notes
a Source: Prepared by Mead & Hunt, 2019
b Source: Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan (1996)
c Source: FAA 5010 Airport Master Record (2019)
Source: Data Compiled by Mead & Hunt (May 2019)
Page 266 of 550
CHAPTER 4 BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
4–8 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This page left intentionally blank
Page 267 of 550
G o b b i S t .
Talmage Rd.
Eastside Rd.
Boonville
Ukiah Rd.
H
ig
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Ukiah
55 CNEL
60 CNEL
65 CNEL
55 CNEL
60 CNEL
65 CNEL 3 3
1 5
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Ukiah
Legend
Existing R unw ay (4,42 3' Ex. Le ng th )
Fu tu re Run way Exten sion (4 ,8 88' Fut. L eng th )
Existing Airp ort Pro pe rty Bou nda ry
City Limit Bou nda ry
!
!!
!
!!
City Sphe re of Influ en ce (extend s o ff map view )
Airpo rt Influe nce Area
Exhibit 4-4
Compatibility Factors: NoiseUkiah M unicipal AirportSource: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
CHAPTER 4BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
0 2,500 5,000Feet
F
Airport Noise Contours
Avg. Annual Day (30,916 Future Annual Ops)
Cal Fire Typical Fire-Event Day
Notes
1. Source: Mead & Hunt, Inc. (May 2019). Forecast based on2019 activity data provided by Ukiah M unicipal AirportManagement. Forecast represents a theoretical m aximumfor com patibility planning purposes.
2. Source: Mead & Hunt, Inc. (2019). The Cal Fire noisecontours represent a typical fire event day w ith 44Departures and 44 arrivals split evenly between R unways15 and 33. Aircraft type m odeled was the S-2T.
3. Portions of the Airport Influence Area may extend beyondmap limits.
Mendocino CountyAirport Land Use Commission
(Adopted May 20, 2021)
Ukiah Municipal AirportLand Use Compatibility Plan
2
1
3
Co mpatibility Zones
Zone 1: Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
Zone 1*: Ultimate Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
Zone 2: Inner Aprroach/Departure Zone
Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone
Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5: Sideline Zone
Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
Urba n Overlay Zo ne
Othe r Airpo rt Environs
Page 268 of 550
Page 269 of 550
5 °
6
1
55
1
1
2 3
3
4
2
4
66
6
6
6 G o b b i S t .
Talmage Rd.
Eastside Rd.
Boonville
Ukiah Rd.
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Ukiah
3 3
1 5
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Ukiah
Legend
Existing R unw ay (4,423' E x. Length)
Future R unw ay Extension (4,888' Fut. Length)
Existing Airport Property Boundary
City Limit Boundary
!
!!
!
!!
City S phere of Infl uence (extends off map view)
Airport Influence A rea
Exhibit 4-5
Compatibility Factor: SafetyUkiah M unicipal AirportSource: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
CHAPTER 4BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
0 2,500 5,000Feet
F
Runw ay Protection ZoneInner A pproach/Departure ZoneInner Turning ZoneOuter Approach/Departure ZoneSideline ZoneTraffic Pattern Zone
Handbook Safety Zones (Med. GA Runway)
Safety Zones (Applie d to E xisting Runw ay)
Safety Zones (Applie d to F ut. R unway Extension)
Notes
1. Source: California Airport Land Use PlanningHandbook (Handbook) published by California D epartm entof Transportation, Division of Aeronautics (2011).Consistent w ith Handbook, Zone 1 m odified to reflect theRunway Protection Zone (RPZ) onFAA-approved Airport Layout Plan (2015).
2. Portions of the Airport Influence Area may extend beyondmap limits.
(Adopted May 20, 2021)
Ukiah Municipal AirportLand Use Compatibility Plan
2
1
Mendocino CountyAirport Land U se Commission
Compatibility Zones
Zone 1: Runway Protection Z one (RPZ)
Zone 1*: Ultim ate Runway Pro tection Zone (RPZ)
Zone 2: In ner Aprroach/Depa rture Z one
Zone 3: In ner Turning Zone
Zone 4: Ou ter App roach/Depart ure Zon e
Zone 5: Sideline Zon e
Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Z one
Urb an Overlay Zon e
Oth er Airp ort Environs
123456
Page 270 of 550
Page 271 of 550
G o b b i S t .
Talmage Rd.
Eastside Rd.
Boonville
Ukiah Rd.
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Ukiah
3 3
1 5
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Ukiah
Legend
Existing R unw ay (4,42 3' Ex. Le ng th )
Fu tu re R unw ay Exte nsion (4,88 8' Fu t. Le ngth)
Existing Airp ort Pro pe rty Bou nda ry
City Limit Bou nda ry
!
!!
!
!!
City Sphe re of Influ en ce (extend s o ff map view )
Airpo rt Influe nce Area
Exhibit 4-6
Compatibility Factor: OverflightUkiah M unicipal AirportSource: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
CHAPTER 4BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
0 2,500 5,000Feet
F
Notes
1. Source: General flight patterns identified byUkiah Airport Management.
2. Portions of the Airport Influence Area may extend beyondmap limits.
General Flight Patterns
Fixed Wing Aircraft - Arrival
Fixed Wing Aircraft - Departure
Fixed Wing Aircraft - Touch-and-Go
Helicopter - Arrival
Helicopter - De parture
(Adopted May 20, 2021)
Ukiah Municipal AirportLand Use Compatibility Plan
Mendocino CountyAirport Land Use Commission
2
1
Compatibility Zones
Zone 1: Runway P rotection Zone (RPZ)
Zone 1*: Ultim ate Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
Zone 2: Inner Aprroach/Departure Zone
Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone
Zone 4: O uter Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5: Sideline Zone
Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
Urban Overlay Zone
Other Airport Environs
Page 272 of 550
Page 273 of 550
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
G o b b i S t .
Low Gap Rd.
Vichy Springs R d.
Talmage Rd.
Eastside Rd.
Boonville
Ukiah Rd.
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Ukiah
Horizontal SurfaceElevation 768'(150' Above AirportElevation of 618')20:1Conical Surface7:1 TransitionalSurface, Typ.
20:1 ApproachSurface
34:1 ApproachSurface
968'918'
868'818'768'
7 6 8 '
7 1 8 '
6 6 8 '
3 3
1 5
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Ukiah
Legend
Existing R unw ay (4,42 3' Ex. Le ng th )
Fu tu re Run way Exten sion (4 ,8 88' Fut. L eng th )
Existing Airp ort Pro pe rty Bou nda ry
City Limit Bou nda ry
!
!!
!
!!
City Sphe re of Influ en ce (extend s o ff map view )
Airpo rt Influe nce Area
Exhibit 4-7
Compatibility Factor: AirspaceUkiah M unicipal AirportSource: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
CHAPTER 4BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
0 4,000 8,000Feet
F
Airspace Obstruction Surfaces
Airspa ce Protection Zo nes (14 C FR Pa rt 7 7)
Airspace Pro tection Surface C ontour (50' interval)
Existing Approach Surface (Runway 15; See inset)
Airspa ce Critica l Protectio n Zo ne
Airspa ce Hig h Terra in Zon e
Notes1. Source: Title 14 Code of Federal Regulation Part 77, Safe,Efficient Use and Preservation of N avigableAirspace as applied to Ukiah Municipal Airport futurerunway length.
(Adopted May 20, 2021)
Ukiah Municipal AirportLand Use Compatibility Plan
1 5
1
APPRO ACH SUR FACE CO MPARISON
Future 34:1ApproachSurface
Existing 34:1ApproachSurface
Mendocino CountyAirport Land Use Commission
Hig
hwa
y
10
1
Talmage Rd.
G o b b i S t .
Page 274 of 550
Page 275 of 550
BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS CHAPTER 4
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) 4–9
Exhibit 4-8
Airport Environs Information
Ukiah Municipal Airport
AIRPORT LOCATION
▪ Location
▫ Southeastern Mendocino County
▫ One mile south of Ukiah city center
▫ U.S. Hwy 101 parallels runway 0.3 miles east
▪ Topography
▫ Situated in Ukiah Valley west of Russian River
▫ Surrounded by low hills, Lake Mendocino to the north
and Mayacmas Mountains to the east (2,000 feet above
MSL)
▫ Airport elevation 616 feet
▫ High terrain within 2 miles to the south on approach to
Runway 33
AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND USE JURISDICTIONS
▪ City of Ukiah
▫ Airport property fully within city limits at the south end of
the city
▪ County of Mendocino
▫ Controls lands east of Hwy 101 and south of the airport
▫ 2011 Ukiah Valley Area Plan shows sphere of influence
expanding city limits mostly to the west and north, not
near the airport
EXISTING AIRPORT AREA LAND USES
▪ General Character
▫ Urbanized north and west of the airport and between
the airport and Hwy 101 on the east
▫ Generally rural to the south
▫ Agricultural beyond Hwy 101 to the east
▪ Runway Approaches
▫ North (Runway 15): Mixed industrial, commercial, and
residential adjacent to the runway protection zone; city
center further north
▫ South (Runway 33): Mixed low-density commercial and
residential uses plus agricultural
▪ Traffic Pattern
▫ No traffic pattern west of the runway; area is largely
residential
▫ Recent big-box commercial development between the
runway and Hwy 101 to the east; mostly agricultural
uses underlying the downwind leg of the traffic pattern
STATUS OF COMMUNITY PLANS
▪ City of Ukiah
▫ General Plan and Growth Management Program
Adopted December 6, 1995
▫ Form Based Zoning Downtown Plan
▪ County of Mendocino
▫ Mendocino County General Plan Adopted August 2009
▫ Ukiah Valley Area Plan Adopted August 2, 2011
PLANNED AIRPORT AREA LAND USES
▪ City of Ukiah
▫ Rural Residential (1 du/ac); Residential uses of mixed
types to northeast; Low Density (1-6 du/ac); Medium
Density (1-14 du/ac); and High Density (1-28 du/ac)
uses north of the airport
▫ No expansion into the agricultural areas east of the
airport is planned
ESTABLISHED COMPATIBILITY MEASURES
▪ Mendocino County General Plan (Adopted August 2009)
▫ Policy DE-165: Improve airport facilities and encourage
economic development and uses that support airport
viability.
▫ Policy DE-166: Land use decisions and development
should be carried out in a manner that will reduce
aviation-related hazards (including hazards to aircraft,
and hazards posed by aircraft). This could be
accomplished through a variety of measures, including
the following: maintaining compatible zoning, land uses,
densities, and intensities within airport influence zones;
protecting the viability of existing airport operations and
expansion potential.
▫ Policy DE-167: Development in air traffic patterns,
corridors, and airport influence zones shall be
consistent with the Mendocino County Airport
Comprehensive Land Use Plan and California Division
of Aeronautics and Federal Aviation Administration
regulations.
▫ Action Item DE-167.1: Update the Airport
Comprehensive Land Use Plan when changes in the
aviation sector or airport use warrant a revision of
land use restrictions.
▪ City of Ukiah General Plan (Adopted December 6, 1995)
▫ Goal AE-1: Promote the airport for the community’s
benefit both now and in the future
▫ Policy AE-1.1: Recognize that the airport’s vitality and
growth help achieve the General Plan Vision.
▫ Goal AE-2: Provide for long-term viability of the airport.
▫ Policy AE-2.1: Define the long-term growth boundaries
for the airport.
▫ Goal AE-3: Establish uniform ordinances and
regulations for land use in the airport’s core and
peripheral overlay zones.
▫ Policy AE-3.1: Work with the County to develop a
similar or duplicate implementing code for development
in and around the airport.
▫ Policy AE-3.2: Promote acceptable land uses for both
city and county zones in the core and peripheral zone
areas.
▫ Goal AE-4: Promote a “good neighbor policy” by the
airport and its users.
▫ Policy AE-4.1: Develop a Noise Control program.
▫ Policy AE-4.2: Identify common noise levels in and
around the airport to identify “airport-specific” noise.
Page 276 of 550
CHAPTER 4 BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
4–10 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Exhibit 4-8, continued
▪ Ukiah Valley Area Plan, Section 3, Land Use and
Community Development (Adopted by Mendocino
County August 2, 2011)
▫ Goal LU2: Promote compatible land uses adjacent to
important transportation facilities and protect against
incompatible ones.
▫ Policy LU 2.1: Define acceptable standards for
development in the vicinity of the airport.
▫ Policy LU 2.1a: Clear Zone: Prohibit development in
the clear zone as defined in the Ukiah Municipal
Airport Master Plan.
▫ Policy LU 2.1b: Compatibility Guidelines: Only allow
development within each airport zone that conforms to
the height, use, and intensity specified in the land use
compatibility table of the ACLUP. As airports evolve
and fuel prices change, collaborate with the City of
Ukiah, the County Airport Land Use Commission , and
Caltrans Aeronautics to reassess compatibility issues.
▪ Ukiah Valley Area Plan, Section 5, Circulation and
Transportation (Adopted by Mendocino County August 2,
2011)
▫ Goal CT1: Provide for efficient and safe circulation
networks throughout the Ukiah Valley.
▫ Policy CT1.1: Promote the development of an
integrated transportation corridor through the Valley
▫ CT1.1a Identification of Integrated Transportation
Corridor: work with local and regional agencies to
define and develop an integrated transportation
corridor. The integrated transportation corridor shall
encompass U.S. Highway 101; major thoroughfares;
and rail, air, and public transportation to proactively
manage travel demand by identifying underutilized
capacity in the corridor and shift travel demand
accordingly.
Source: Data Compiled by Mead & Hunt (March 2019)
Page 277 of 550
G o b b i S t .
Talmage Rd.
Eastside Rd.
Boonville
Ukiah Rd.
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Ukiah
3 3
1 5
1
Hastings Ave.
P e r k i n s S t .S m i t h S t .
Gobalet St.
D
o
r
a
S
t
.
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
P
a
r
k
B
l
v
d
.
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
R
d
.
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
.
4
3
5 51 6
2
3
4
3
6
6
3 2
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
6
6
6
Ukiah
A G 4 0
R M R 4 0
R L 1 6 0
S R
S R
R M R 4 0
R L 1 6 0
R L 1 6 0
I
R C
CRR 5
I
R L 1 6 0
R R 5
I
R L 1 6 0 R R 1 0
P S
P L
C
R R 5
R R 1 0RMR 2 0
R R 5
R R 5
M U -2
R R 5
C
M U -2
S R
P S
I
S R
R R 5
S R
M U -2
S R
Legend
Existing R unw ay (4,42 3' Ex. Le ng th )
Fu tu re R unw ay Exte nsion (4,88 8' Fu t. Le ngth)
Existing Airp ort Pro pe rty Bou nda ry
City Limit Bou nda ry
!
!!
!
!!
City Sphe re of Influ en ce (extend s o ff map view )
Airpo rt Influe nce Area
Exhibit 4-9
General Plan Land UsesUkiah M unicipal Airport
Source: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
CHAPTER 4BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
0 2,500 5,000Feet
F
Notes1. Source: Mendocino C ounty Planning Departm ent(April 2019).
2. Portions of the Airport Influence Area may extend beyondmap limits.
Ge ne ra l P lan
Agriculture 40 ac
Commercial
Industrial
Mixed Use 2 ac (MU2)
Public Lands
Public Service
Rural Community
Range Land 160 ac
Remote Residential 20 ac
Remote Residential 40 ac
Rural Residential 10 ac
Rural Residential 5 ac
Suburban Residential
(Adopted May 20, 2021)
Ukiah Municipal AirportLand Use Compatibility Plan
1
2
Mendocino CountyAirport Land Use Commission
Compatibility Zones
Zone 1: R unw ay Protection Zone (R PZ)
Zone 1*: U ltimate R unw ay Protection Zone (R PZ)
Zone 2: Inner A prroach/Departure Zone
Zone 3: Inner Turni ng Zone
Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5: S ideline Zone
Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
Urban Overlay Zone
County of Mendocino
Page 278 of 550
Page 279 of 550
G o b b i S t .
Talmage Rd.
Eastside Rd.
Boonville
Ukiah Rd.
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Ukiah
3 3
1 5
4
3
5 51 6
2
3
4
3
7
6
Hastings Ave.
P e r k i n s S t .S m i t h S t .
Gobalet St.
D
o
r
a
S
t
.
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
P
a
r
k
B
l
v
d
.
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
R
d
.
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
.
6
3 2
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
Mend ocino County(Unincorporated)
6
6
6
Ukiah
Legend
Existing R unw ay (4,42 3' Ex. Le ng th )
Fu tu re R unw ay Exte nsion (4,88 8' Fu t. Le ngth)
Existing Airp ort Pro pe rty Bou nda ry
City Limit Bou nda ry
!
!!
!
!!
City Sphe re of Influ en ce (extend s o ff map view )
Airpo rt Influe nce Area
Exhibit 4-10
Source: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
CHAPTER 4BACKGROUND DATA: UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AND ENVIRONS
0 2,500 5,000Feet
F
Notes
1. Source: City of Ukiah.
2. Portions of the Airport Influence Area may extend beyondmap limits
(Adopted May 20, 2021)
Ukiah Municipal AirportLand Use Compatibility Plan
2
Mendocino CountyAirport Land Use Commission
1
City of Ukiah General Land UsesUkiah M unicipal Airport
Compatibility Zones
Zone 1: R unway Protection Zone (R PZ)
Zone 1*: U ltimate Runw ay Protection Zone (RPZ)
Zone 2: Inner Aprroach/Departure Zone
Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone
Zone 4: O uter Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5: Sideline Zone
Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
Urban Overlay Zone
City of Uki ah Zoning Cla ssifications
R1 - Sin gle Family Residential
R1H - Single Fam ily R esidential - Hillside
R2 - Medium Density Residential
R3 - High D ensity R esidential
CN - Neighborhood Comm ercial
C1 - Com munity Com mercial
C2 - Heavy Comm ercial
PDC - Planned Development Comm ercial
PDR - Planned Development Reside ntial
M - Manufacturing
DC - Dow ntow n C ore
GU - Ge neral U rba n
UC - Urban Center
PF - Public Facility
Page 280 of 550
Page 281 of 550
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
APPENDICES
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Page 282 of 550
Page 283 of 550
A P P E N D I X A
State Laws Related to Airport Land Use Planning
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–1
Table of Contents
(as of January 2020)
Public Utilities Code
Sections
21670 – 21679.5 Airport Land Use Commission ........................................................... A–3
(complete article)
21402 – 21403 Regulation of Aeronautics .................................................................. A–16
(excerpts pertaining to rights of aircraft flight)
21655, 21658, 21659 Regulation of Obstructions ................................................................ A–17
(excerpts)
21661.5, 21664.5 Regulation of Airports ........................................................................ A–19
(excerpts pertaining to approval of new airports and
airport expansion)
Government Code
Sections
65302.3 Authority for and Scope of General Plans....................................... A–20
(excerpts pertaining to general plans
consistency with airport land use plans)
65943 – 65945.7 Application for Development Projects ............................................ A–21
(excerpts referenced in State Aeronautics Act)
66030 – 66031 Mediation and Resolution of Land Use Disputes ........................... A–26
(excerpts applicable to ALUC decisions)
66455.9 School Site Review .............................................................................. A–28
(excerpts applicable to ALUCs)
Education Code
Sections
17215 School Facilities, General Provisions ................................................ A–29
(excerpts pertaining to Department of Transportation
review of elementary and secondary school sites)
81033 Community Colleges, School Sites .................................................... A–30
(excerpts pertaining to Department of Transportation
review of community college sites)
Page 284 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–2 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Public Resources Code
Sections
21096 California Environmental Quality Act, Airport Planning .............. A–32
(excerpts pertaining to projects near airports)
Business and Professions Code
Sections
11010 Regulation of Real Estate Transactions, Subdivided Lands .......... A–33
(excerpts regarding airport influence area disclosure
requirements)
Civil Code
Sections
1103 – 1103.4 Disclosure of Natural Hazards upon Transfer of Residential
Property ........................................................................................ A–34
1353 Common Interest Developments...................................................... A–38
(excerpts regarding airport influence area disclosure
requirements)
Legislative History Summary
Airport Land Use Commission Statutes ...................................................................................... A–39
Page 285 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–3
AERONAUTICS LAW
PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
Division 9—Aviation
Part 1—State Aeronautics Act
Chapter 4—Airports and Air Navigation Facilities
Article 3.5—Airport Land Use Commission
21670. Creation; Membership; Selection
(a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares that:
(1) It is in the public interest to provide for the orderly development of each public use airport in
this state and the area surrounding these airports so as to promote the overall goals and
objectives of the California airport noise standards adopted pursuant to Section 21669 and to
prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems.
(2) It is the purpose of this article to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the
orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s
exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent
that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.
(b) In order to achieve the purposes of this article, every county in which there is located an airport
which is served by a scheduled airline shall establish an airport land use commission. Every county,
in which there is located an airport which is not served by a scheduled airline, but is operated for the
benefit of the general public, shall establish an airport land use commission, except that the board
of supervisors of the county may, after consultation with the appropriate airport operators and
affected local entities and after a public hearing, adopt a resolution finding that there are no noise,
public safety, or land use issues affecting any airport in the county which require the creation of a
commission and declaring the county exempt from that requirement. The board shall, in this event,
transmit a copy of the resolution to the Director of Transportation. For purposes of this section,
“commission” means an airport land use commission. Each commission shall consist of seven
members to be selected as follows:
(1) Two representing the cities in the county, appointed by a city selection committee comprised
of the mayors of all the cities within that county, except that if there are any cities contiguous
or adjacent to the qualifying airport, at least one representative shall be appointed therefrom. If
there are no cities within a county, the number of representatives provided for by paragraphs
(2) and (3) shall each be increased by one.
(2) Two representing the county, appointed by the board of supervisors.
(3) Two having expertise in aviation, appointed by a selection committee comprised of the
managers of all of the public airports within that county.
(4) One representing the general public, appointed by the other six members of the commission.
(c) Public officers, whether elected or appointed, may be appointed and serve as members of the
commission during their terms of public office.
(d) Each member shall promptly appoint a single proxy to represent him or her in commission affairs
and to vote on all matters when the member is not in attendance. The proxy shall be designated in
Page 286 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–4 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
a signed written instrument which shall be kept on file at the commission offices, and the proxy shall
serve at the pleasure of the appointing member. A vacancy in the office of proxy shall be filled
promptly by appointment of a new proxy.
(e) A person having an “expertise in aviation” means a person who, by way of education, training,
business, experience, vocation, or avocation has acquired and possesses particular knowledge of, and
familiarity with, the function, operation, and role of airports, or is an elected official of a local agency
which owns or operates an airport.
(f) It is the intent of the Legislature to clarify that, for the purposes of this article that special districts,
school districts and community college districts are included among the local agencies that are subject
to airport land use laws and other requirements of this article.
21670.1. Action by Designated Body Instead of Commission
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, if the board of supervisors and the city selection
committee of mayors in the county each makes a determination by a majority vote that proper land
use planning can be accomplished through the actions of an appropriately designated body, then the
body so designated shall assume the planning responsibilities of an airport land use commission as
provided for in this article, and a commission need not be formed in that county.
(b) A body designated pursuant to subdivision (a) that does not include among its membership at least
two members having expertise in aviation, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 21670, shall, when
acting in the capacity of an airport land use commission, be augmented so that body, as augmented,
will have at least two members having that expertise. The commission shall be constituted pursuant
to this section on and after March 1, 1988.
(c) (1) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a) and (b), and subdivision (b) of Section 21670, if the board of
supervisors of a county and each affected city in that county each makes a determina tion that
proper land use planning pursuant to this article can be accomplished pursuant to this
subdivision, then a commission need not be formed in that county.
(2) If the board of supervisors of a county and each affected city makes a determination that proper
land use planning may be accomplished and a commission is not formed pursuant to paragraph
(1), that county and the appropriate affected cities having jurisdiction over an airport, subject to
the review and approval by the Division of Aeronautics of the department, shall do all of the
following:
(A) Adopt processes for the preparation, adoption, and amendment of the airport land use
compatibility plan for each airport that is served by a scheduled airline or operated for the
benefit of the general public.
(B) Adopt processes for the notification of the general public, landowners, interested groups,
and other public agencies regarding the preparation, adoption, and amendment of the
airport land use compatibility plans.
(C) Adopt processes for the mediation of disputes arising from the preparation, adoption, and
amendment of the airport land use compatibility plans.
(D) Adopt processes for the amendment of general and specific plans to be consistent with the
airport land use compatibility plans.
(E) Designate the agency that shall be responsible for the preparation, adoption, and
amendment of each airport land use compatibility plan.
Page 287 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–5
(3) The Division of Aeronautics of the department shall review the processes adopted pursuant to
paragraph (2), and shall approve the processes if the division determines that the processes are
consistent with the procedure required by this article and will do all of the following:
(A) Result in the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans within a reasonable
amount of time.
(B) Rely on the height, use, noise, safety, and density criteria that are compatible with airport
operations, as established by this article, and referred to as the Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook, published by the division, and any applicable federal aviation regulations,
including, but not limited to, Part 77 (commencing with Section 77.1) of Title 14 of the
Code of Federal Regulations.
(C) Provide adequate opportunities for notice to, review of, and comment by the general
public, landowners, interested groups, and other public agencies.
(4) If the county does not comply with the requirements of paragraph (2) within 120 days, then the
airport land use compatibility plan and amendments shall not be considered adopted pursuant
to this article and a commission shall be established within 90 days of the determination of
noncompliance by the division and an airport land use compatibility plan shall be adopted
pursuant to this article within 90 days of the establishment of the commission.
(d) A commission need not be formed in a county that has contracted for the preparation of airport
land use compatibility plans with the Division of Aeronautics under the California Aid to Airports
Program (Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 4050) of Division 2.5 of Title 21 of the California
Code of Regulations) and that submits all of the following information to the Division of
Aeronautics for review and comment that the county and the cities affected by the airports within
the county, as defined by the airport land use compatibility plans:
(1) Agree to adopt and implement the airport land use compatibility plans that have been developed
under contract.
(2) Incorporated the height, use, noise, safety, and density criteria that are compatible with airport
operations as established by this article, and referred to as the Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook, published by the division, and any applicable federal aviation regulations, including,
but not limited to, Part 77 (commencing with Section 77.1) of Title 14 of t he Code of Federal
Regulations as part of the general and specific plans for the county and for each affected city.
(3) If the county does not comply with this subdivision on or before May 1, 1995, then a
commission shall be established in accordance with this article.
(e) (1) A commission need not be formed in a county if all of the following conditions are met:
(A) The county has only one public use airport that is owned by a city.
(B) (i) The county and the affected city adopt the elements in paragraph (2) of subdivision
(d), as part of their general and specific plans for the county and the affected city.
(ii) The general and specific plans shall be submitted, upon adoption, to the Division of
Aeronautics. If the county and the affected city do not submit the elements specified
in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d), on or before May 1, 1996, then a commission shall
be established in accordance with this article.
Page 288 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–6 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
21670.2. Application to Counties Having over 4 Million in Population
(a) Sections 21670 and 21670.1 do not apply to the County of Los Angeles. In that county, the county
regional planning commission has the responsibility for coordinating the airport planning of public
agencies within the county. In instances where impasses result relative to this planning, an appeal
may be made to the county regional planning commission by any public agency involved. The action
taken by the county regional planning commission on an appeal may be overruled by a four-fifths
vote of the governing body of a public agency whose planning led to the appeal.
(b) By January 1, 1992, the county regional planning commission shall adopt the airport land use
compatibility plans required pursuant to Section 21675.
(c) Sections 21675.1, 21675.2, and 21679.5 do not apply to the County of Los Angeles until January 1,
1992. If the airport land use compatibility plans required pursuant to Section 21675 are not adopted
by the county regional planning commission by January 1, 1992, Sections 21675.1 and 21675.2 shall
apply to the County of Los Angeles until the airport land use compatibility plans are adopted.
21670.3 San Diego County
(a) Sections 21670 and 21670.1 do not apply to the County of San Diego. In that county, the San Diego
County Regional Airport Authority, as established pursuant to Section 170002, shall be responsible
for the preparation, adoption, and amendment of an airport land use compatibility plan for each
airport in San Diego County.
(b) The San Diego County Regional Airport Authority shall engage in a public collaborative planning
process when preparing and updating an airport land use compatibility plan.
21670.4. Intercounty Airports
(a) As used in this section, “intercounty airport” means any airport bisected by a county line through its
runways, runway protection zones, inner safety zones, inner turning zones, outer safety zones, or
sideline safety zones, as defined by the department’s Airport Land Use Planning Handbook and
referenced in the airport land use compatibility plan formulated under Section 21675.
(b) It is the purpose of this section to provide the opportunity to establish a separate airport land use
commission so that an intercounty airport may be served by a single airport land use planning agency,
rather than having to look separately to the airport land use commissions of the affected counties.
(c) In addition to the airport land use commissions created under Section 21670 or the alternatives
established under Section 21670.1, for their respective counties, the boards of supervisors and city
selection committees for the affected counties, by independent majority vote of each county’s two
delegations, for any intercounty airport, may do either of the following:
(1) Establish a single separate airport land use commission for that airport. That commission shall
consist of seven members to be selected as follows:
(A) One representing the cities in each of the counties, appointed by that county’s city selection
committee.
(B) One representing each of the counties, appointed by the board of supervisors of each
county.
(C) One from each county having expertise in aviation, appointed by a selection committee
comprised of the managers of all the public airports within that county.
Page 289 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–7
(D) One representing the general public, appointed by the other six members of the
commission.
(2) In accordance with subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 21670.1, designate an existing appropriate
entity as that airport’s land use commission.
21670.6. Court and Mediation Proceedings
Any action brought in the superior court relating to this article may be subject to mediation proceeding
conducted pursuant to Chapter 9.3 (commencing with Section 66030) of Division I of Title 7 of the
Government Code.
21671. Airports Owned by a City, District or County
In any county where there is an airport operated for the general public which is owned by a city or district
in another county or by another county, one of the representatives provided by paragraph (1) of
subdivision (b) of Section 21670 shall be appointed by the city selection committee of mayors of the cities
of the county in which the owner of that airport is located, and one of the representatives provided by
paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 21670 shall be appointed by the board of supervisors of the
county in which the owner of that airport is located.
21671.5. Term of Office
(a) Except for the terms of office of the members of the first commission, the term of office of each
member shall be four years and until the appointment and qualification of his or her successor. The
members of the first commission shall classify themselves by lot so that the term of office of one
member is one year, of two members is two years, of two members is three years, and of two
members is four years. The body that originally appointed a member whose term has expired shall
appoint his or her successor for a full term of four years. Any member may be removed at any time
and without cause by the body appointing that member. The expiration date of the term of office of
each member shall be the first Monday in May in the year in which that member’s term is to expire.
Any vacancy in the membership of the commission shall be filled for the unexpired term by
appointment by the body which originally appointed the member whose office has become vacant.
The chairperson of the commission shall be selected by the members thereof.
(b) Compensation, if any, shall be determined by the board of supervisors.
(c) Staff assistance, including the mailing of notices and the keeping of minutes and necessary quarters,
equipment, and supplies, shall be provided by the county. The usual and necessary operating
expenses of the commission shall be a county charge.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this article, the commission shall not employ any personnel
either as employees or independent contractors without the prior approval of the board of
supervisors.
(e) The commission shall meet at the call of the commission chairperson or at the request of the majority
of the commission members. A majority of the commission members shall constitute a quorum for
the transaction of business. No action shall be taken by the commission except by the recorded vote
of a majority of the full membership.
(f) The commission may establish a schedule of fees necessary to comply with this article. Those fees
shall be charged to the proponents of actions, regulations, or permits, shall not exceed the estimated
Page 290 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–8 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
reasonable cost of providing the service, and shall be imposed pursuant to Section 66016 of the
Government Code. Except as provided in subdivision (g), after June 30, 1991, a commission that
has not adopted the airport land use compatibility plan required by Section 21675 shall not charge
fees pursuant to this subdivision until the commission adopts the plan.
(g) In any county that has undertaken by contract or otherwise completed airport land use compatibility
plans for at least one-half of all public use airports in the county, the commission may continue to
charge fees necessary to comply with this article until June 30, 1992, and, if the airport land use
compatibility plans are complete by that date, may continue charging fees after June 30, 1992. If the
airport land use compatibility plans are not complete by June 30, 1992, the commission shall not
charge fees pursuant to subdivision (f) until the commission adopts the land use plans.
21672. Rules and Regulations
Each commission shall adopt rules and regulations with respect to the temporary disqualification of its
members from participating in the review or adoption of a proposal because of conflict of interest and
with respect to appointment of substitute members in such cases.
21673. Initiation of Proceedings for Creation by Owner of Airport
In any county not having a commission or a body designated to carry out the responsibilities of a
commission, any owner of a public airport may initiate proceedings for the creation of a commission by
presenting a request to the board of supervisors that a commission be created and showing the need
therefor to the satisfaction of the board of supervisors.
21674. Powers and Duties
The commission has the following powers and duties, subject to the limitations upon its jurisdiction set
forth in Section 21676:
(a) To assist local agencies in ensuring compatible land uses in the vicinity of all new airports and in the
vicinity of existing airports to the extent that the land in the vicinity of those airports is not already
devoted to incompatible uses.
(b) To coordinate planning at the state, regional, and local levels so as to provide for the orderly de-
velopment of air transportation, while at the same time protecting the public health, safety, and
welfare.
(c) To prepare and adopt an airport land use compatibility plan pursuant to Section 21675.
(d) To review the plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies and airport operators pursuant
to Section 21676.
(e) The powers of the commission shall in no way be construed to give the commission jurisdiction
over the operation of any airport.
(f) In order to carry out its responsibilities, the commission may adopt rules and regulations consistent
with this article.
Page 291 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–9
21674.5. Training of Airport Land Use Commission’s Staff
(a) The Department of Transportation shall develop and implement a program or programs to assist in
the training and development of the staff of airport land use commissions, after consulting with
airport land use commissions, cities, counties, and other appropriate public entities.
(b) The training and development program or programs are intended to assist the staff of airport land
use commissions in addressing high priority needs, and may include, but need not be limited to, the
following:
(1) The establishment of a process for the development and adoption of airport land use
compatibility plans.
(2) The development of criteria for determining the airport influence area.
(3) The identification of essential elements that should be included in the airport land use
compatibility plans.
(4) Appropriate criteria and procedures for reviewing proposed developments and determining
whether proposed developments are compatible with the airport use.
(5) Any other organizational, operational, procedural, or technical responsibilities and functions
that the department determines to be appropriate to provide to commission staff and for which
it determines there is a need for staff training or development.
(c) The department may provide training and development programs for airport land use commission
staff pursuant to this section by any means it deems appropriate. Those programs may be presented
in any of the following ways:
(1) By offering formal courses or training programs.
(2) By sponsoring or assisting in the organization and sponsorship of conferences, seminars, or
other similar events.
(3) By producing and making available written information.
(4) Any other feasible method of providing information and assisting in the training and
development of airport land use commission staff.
21674.7. Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
(a) An airport land use commission that formulates, adopts or amends an airport land use compatibility
plan shall be guided by information prepared and updated pursuant to Section 21674.5 and referred
to as the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook published by the Division of Aeronautics of the
Department of Transportation.
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature to discourage incompatible land uses near existing airports.
Therefore, prior to granting permits for the renovation or remodeling of an existing building,
structure, or facility, and before the construction of a new building, it is the intent of the Legislature
that local agencies shall be guided by the height, use, noise, safety, and density criteria that are
compatible with airport operations, as established by this article, and referred to as the Airport Land
Use Planning Handbook, published by the division, and any applicable federal aviation regulations,
including, but not limited to, Part 77 (commencing with Section 77.1) of Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, to the extent that the criteria has been incorporated into the plan prepared by
a commission pursuant to Section 21675. This subdivision does not limit the jurisdiction of a
Page 292 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–10 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
commission as established by this article. This subdivision does not limit the authority of local
agencies to overrule commission actions or recommendations pursuant to Sections 21676, 21676.5,
or 21677.
21675. Land Use Plan
(a) Each commission shall formulate an airport land use compatibility plan that will provide for the
orderly growth of each public airport and the area surrounding the airport within the jurisdiction of
the commission, and will safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the
airport and the public in general. The commission’s airport land use compatibility plan shall include
and shall be based on a long-range master plan or an airport layout plan, as determined by the
Division of Aeronautics of the Department of Transportation that reflects the anticipated growth of
the airport during at least the next 20 years. In formulating an airport land use compatibility plan,
the commission may develop height restrictions on buildings, specify use of land, and determine
building standards, including soundproofing adjacent to airports, within the airport influence area.
The airport land use compatibility plan shall be reviewed as often as necessary in order to accomplish
its purposes, but shall not be amended more than once in any calendar year.
(b) The commission shall include, within its airport land use compatibility plan formulated pursuant to
subdivision (a), the area within the jurisdiction of the commission surrounding any military airport
for all of the purposes specified in subdivision (a). The airport land use compatibility plan shall be
consistent with the safety and noise standards in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone prepared
for that military airport. This subdivision does not give the commission any jurisdiction or authority
over the territory or operations of any military airport.
(c) The airport influence area shall be established by the commission after hearing and consultation with
the involved agencies.
(d) The commission shall submit to the Division of Aeronautics of the department one copy of the
airport land use compatibility plan and each amendment to the plan.
(e) If an airport land use compatibility plan does not include the matters required to be included
pursuant to this article, the Division of Aeronautics of the department shall notify the commission
responsible for the plan.
21675.1. Adoption of Land Use Plan
(a) By June 30, 1991, each commission shall adopt the airport land use compatibility plan required
pursuant to Section 21675, except that any county that has undertaken by contract or otherwise
completed airport land use compatibility plans for at least one-half of all public use airports in the
county, shall adopt that airport land use compatibility plan on or before June 30, 1992.
(b) Until a commission adopts an airport land use compatibility plan, a city or county shall first submit
all actions, regulations, and permits within the vicinity of a public airport to the commission for
review and approval. Before the commission approves or disapproves any actions, regulations, or
permits, the commission shall give public notice in the same manner as the city or county is required
to give for those actions, regulations, or permits. As used in this section, “vicinity” means land that
will be included or reasonably could be included within the airport land use compatibility plan. If the
commission has not designated an airport influence area for the airport land use compatibility plan,
then “vicinity” means land within two miles of the boundary of a public airport.
Page 293 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–11
(c) The commission may approve an action, regulation, or permit if it finds, based on substantial
evidence in the record, all of the following:
(1) The commission is making substantial progress toward the completion of the airport land use
compatibility plan.
(2) There is a reasonable probability that the action, regulation, or permit will be consistent with
the airport land use compatibility plan being prepared by the commission.
(3) There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future
adopted airport land use compatibility plan if the action, regulation, or permit is ultimately
inconsistent with the airport land use compatibility plan.
(d) If the commission disapproves an action, regulation, or permit, the commission shall notify the city
or county. The city or county may overrule the commission, by a two-thirds vote of its governing
body, if it makes specific findings that the proposed action, regulation, or permit is consistent with
the purposes of this article, as stated in Section 21670.
(e) If a city or county overrules the commission pursuant to subdivision (d), that action shall not relieve
the city or county from further compliance with this article after the commission adopts the airport
land use compatibility plan.
(f) If a city or county overrules the commission pursuant to subdivision (d) with respect to a publicly
owned airport that the city or county does not operate, the operator of the airport is not liable for
damages to property or personal injury resulting from the city’s or county’s decision to proceed with
the action, regulation, or permit.
(g) A commission may adopt rules and regulations that exempt any ministerial permit for single-family
dwellings from the requirements of subdivision (b) if it makes the findings required pursuant to
subdivision (c) for the proposed rules and regulations, except that the rules and regulations may not
exempt either of the following:
(1) More than two single-family dwellings by the same applicant within a subdivision prior to June
30, 1991.
(2) Single-family dwellings in a subdivision where 25 percent or more of the parcels are
undeveloped.
21675.2. Approval or Disapproval of Actions, Regulations, or Permits
(a) If a commission fails to act to approve or disapprove any actions, regulations, or permits within 60
days of receiving the request pursuant to Section 21675.1, the applicant or his or her representative
may file an action pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure to compel the
commission to act, and the court shall give the proceedings preference over all other actions or
proceedings, except previously filed pending matters of the same character.
(b) The action, regulation, or permit shall be deemed approved only if the public notice required by this
subdivision has occurred. If the applicant has provided seven days advance notice to the commission
of the intent to provide public notice pursuant to this subdivision, then, not earlier than the date of
the expiration of the time limit established by Section 21675.1, an applicant may provide the required
public notice. If the applicant chooses to provide public notice, that notice shall include a description
of the proposed action, regulation, or permit substantially similar to the descriptions which are
commonly used in public notices by the commission, the location of any proposed development,
the application number, the name and address of the commission, and a statement that the action,
Page 294 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–12 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
regulation, or permit shall be deemed approved if the commission has not acted within 60 days. If
the applicant has provided the public notice specified in this subdivision, the time limit for action by
the commission shall be extended to 60 days after the public notice is provided. If the applicant
provides notice pursuant to this section, the commission shall refund to the applicant any fees which
were collected for providing notice and which were not used for that purpose.
(c) Failure of an applicant to submit complete or adequate information pursuant to Sections 65943 to
65946, inclusive, of the Government Code, may constitute grounds for disapproval of actions,
regulations, or permits.
(d) Nothing in this section diminishes the commission’s legal responsibility to provide, where applicable,
public notice and hearing before acting on an action, regulation, or permit.
21676. Review of Local General Plans
(a) Each local agency whose general plan includes areas covered by an airport land use compatibility
plan shall, by July 1, 1983, submit a copy of its plan or specific plans to the airport land use com -
mission. The commission shall determine by August 31, 1983, whether the plan or plans are
consistent or inconsistent with the airport land use compatibility plan. If the plan or plans are
inconsistent with the airport land use compatibility plan, the local agency shall be notified and that
local agency shall have another hearing to reconsider its airport land use compatibility plans. The
local agency may propose to overrule the commission after the hearing by a two-thirds vote of its
governing body if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes
of this article stated in Section 21670. At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the
commission, the local agency governing body shall provide the commission and the division a copy
of the proposed decision and findings. The commission and the division may provide comments to
the local agency governing body within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. If
the commission or the division’s comments are not available within this time limit, the local agency
governing body may act without them. The comments by the division or the commission are
advisory to the local agency governing body. The local agency governing body shall include
comments from the commission and the division in the final record of any final decision to overrule
the commission, which may only be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the governing body.
(b) Prior to the amendment of a general plan or specific plan, or the adoption or approval of a zoning
ordinance or building regulation within the planning boundary established by the airport land use
commission pursuant to Section 21675, the local agency shall first refer the proposed action to the
commission. If the commission determines that the proposed action is inconsistent with the
commission’s plan, the referring agency shall be notified. The local agency may, after a public
hearing, propose to overrule the commission by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes
specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this article stated in
Section 21670. At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the commission, the local agency
governing body shall provide the commission and the division a copy of the proposed decision and
findings. The commission and the division may provide comments to the local agency governing
body within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. If the commission or the
division’s comments are not available within this time limit, the local agency governing body may act
without them. The comments by the division or the commission are advisory to the local agency
governing body. The local agency governing body shall include comments from the commission and
the division in the public record of any final decision to overrule the commission, which may only
be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the governing body.
Page 295 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–13
(c) Each public agency owning any airport within the boundaries of an airport land use compatibility
plan shall, prior to modification of its airport master plan, refer any proposed change to the airport
land use commission. If the commission determines that the proposed action is inconsistent with
the commission’s plan, the referring agency shall be notified. The public agency may, after a public
hearing, propose to overrule the commission by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes
specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this article stated in
Section 21670. At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the commission, the public agency
governing body shall provide the commission and the division a copy of the proposed decision and
findings. The commission and the division may provide comments to the public agency governing
body within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. If the commission or the
division’s comments are not available within this time limit, the public agency governing body may
act without them. The comments by the division or the commission are advisory to the public agency
governing body. The public agency governing body shall include comments from the commission
and the division in the final decision to overrule the commission, which may only be adopted by a
two-thirds vote of the governing body.
(d) Each commission determination pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c) shall be made within 60 days from
the date of referral of the proposed action. If a commission fails to make the determination within
that period, the proposed action shall be deemed consistent with the airport land use compatibility
plan.
21676.5. Review of Local Plans
(a) If the commission finds that a local agency has not revised its general plan or specific plan or
overruled the commission by a two-thirds vote of its governing body after making specific findings
that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this article as stated in Section 21670, the
commission may require that the local agency submit all subsequent actions, regulations, and permits
to the commission for review until its general plan or specific plan is revised or the specific findings
are made. If, in the determination of the commission, an action, regulation, or permit of the local
agency is inconsistent with the airport land use compatibility plan, the local agency shall be notified
and that local agency shall hold a hearing to reconsider its plan. The local agency may propose to
overrule the commission after the hearing by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes
specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this article as stated in
Section 21670. At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the commission, the local agency
governing body shall provide the commission and the division a copy of the proposed decision and
findings. The commission and the division may provide comments to the local agency governing
body within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. If the commission or the
division’s comments are not available within this time limit, the local agency governing body may act
without them. The comments by the division or the commission are advisory to the local agency
governing body. The local agency governing body shall include comments from the commission and
the division in the final decision to overrule the commission, which may only be adopted by a two -
thirds vote of the governing body.
(b) Whenever the local agency has revised its general plan or specific plan or has overruled the
commission pursuant to subdivision (a), the proposed action of the local agency shall not be subject
to further commission review, unless the commission and the local agency agree that individual
projects shall be reviewed by the commission.
Page 296 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–14 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
21677. Marin County Override Provisions
Notwithstanding the two-thirds vote required by Section 21676, any public agency in the County of Marin
may overrule the Marin County Airport Land Use Commission by a majority vote of its governing body.
At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the commission, the public agency governing body shall
provide the commission and the division a copy of the proposed decision and findings. The commission
and the division may provide comments to the public agency governing body within 30 days of receiving
the proposed decision and findings. If the commission or the division’s comments are not available within
this time limit, the public agency governing body may act without them. The comments by the division
or the commission are advisory to the public agency governing body. The public agency governing body
shall include comments from the commission and the division in the public record of the final decision
to overrule the commission, which may be adopted by a majority vote of the governing body.
21678. Airport Owner’s Immunity
With respect to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if the public a gency
pursuant to Section 21676, 21676.5, or 21677 overrules a commission’s action or recommendation, the
operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury caused
by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency’s decision to overrule the commission’s action
or recommendation.
21679. Court Review
(a) In any county in which there is no airport land use commission or other body designated to assume
the responsibilities of an airport land use commission, or in which the commission or other
designated body has not adopted an airport land use compatibility plan, an interested p arty may
initiate proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction to postpone the effective date of a zoning
change, a zoning variance, the issuance of a permit, or the adoption of a regulation by a local agency,
that directly affects the use of land within one mile of the boundary of a public airport within the
county.
(b) The court may issue an injunction that postpones the effective date of the zoning change, zoning
variance, permit, or regulation until the governing body of the local agency that took the action does
one of the following:
(1) In the case of an action that is a legislative act, adopts a resolution declaring that the proposed
action is consistent with the purposes of this article stated in Section 21670.
(2) In the case of an action that is not a legislative act, adopts a resolution making findings based
on substantial evidence in the record that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes
of this article stated in Section 21670.
(3) Rescinds the action.
(4) Amends its action to make it consistent with the purposes of this article stated in Section 21670,
and complies with either paragraph (1) or (2), whichever is applicable.
(c) The court shall not issue an injunction pursuant to subdivision (b) if the local agency that took the
action demonstrates that the general plan and any applicable specific plan of the agency accomplishes
the purposes of an airport land use compatibility plan as provided in Section 21675.
Page 297 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–15
(d) An action brought pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be commenced within 30 days of the decision or
within the appropriate time periods set by Section 21167 of the Public Resources Code, whichever
is longer.
(e) If the governing body of the local agency adopts a resolution pursuant to subdivision (b) with respect
to a publicly owned airport that the local agency does not operate, the operator of the airport shall
be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury from the local agency’s decision
to proceed with the zoning change, zoning variance, permit, or regulation.
(f) As used in this section, “interested party” means any owner of land within two miles of the boundary
of the airport or any organization with a demonstrated interest in airport safety and efficiency.
21679.5. Deferral of Court Review
(a) Until June 30, 1991, no action pursuant to Section 21679 to postpone the effective date of a zoning
change, a zoning variance, the issuance of a permit, or the adoption of a regulation by a local agency,
directly affecting the use of land within one mile of the boundary of a public airport, shall be
commenced in any county in which the commission or other designated body has not adopted an
airport land use compatibility plan, but is making substantial progress toward the completion of the
airport land use compatibility plan.
(b) If a commission has been prevented from adopting the airport land use compatibility plan by June
30, 1991, or if the adopted airport land use compatibility plan could not become effective, because
of a lawsuit involving the adoption of the airport land use compatibility plan, the June 30, 1991, date
in subdivision (a) shall be extended by the period of time during which the lawsuit was pending in a
court of competent jurisdiction.
(c) Any action pursuant to Section 21679 commenced prior to January 1, 1990, in a county in which the
commission or other designated body has not adopted an airport land use compatibility plan, but is
making substantial progress toward the completion of the airport land use compatibility plan, which
has not proceeded to final judgment, shall be held in abeyance until June 30, 1991. If the commission
or other designated body adopts an airport land use compatibility plan on or before June 30, 1991,
the action shall be dismissed. If the commission or other designated body does not adopt an airport
land use compatibility plan on or before June 30, 1991, the plaintiff or plaintiffs may proceed with
the action.
(d) An action to postpone the effective date of a zoning change, a zoning variance, the issuance of a
permit, or the adoption of a regulation by a local agency, directly affecting the use of land within one
mile of the boundary of a public airport for which an airport land use compatibility plan has not
been adopted by June 30, 1991, shall be commenced within 30 days of June 30, 1991, or within 30
days of the decision by the local agency, or within the appropriate time periods set by Section 21167
of the Public Resources Code, whichever date is later.
Page 298 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–16 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
AERONAUTICS LAW
PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
Division 9, Part 1
Chapter 3—Regulation of Aeronautics
(excerpts)
21402. Ownership; Prohibited Use of Airspace
The ownership of the space above the land and waters of this State is vested in the several owners of the
surface beneath, subject to the right of flight described in Section 21403. No use shall be made of such
airspace which would interfere with such right of flight; provided that any use of property in conformity
with an original zone of approach of an airport shall not be rendered unlawful by reason of a change in
such zone of approach.
21403. Lawful Flight; Flight Within Airport Approach Zone
(a) Flight in aircraft over the land and waters of this state is lawful, unless at a ltitudes below those
prescribed by federal authority, or unless conducted so as to be imminently dangerous to persons or
property lawfully on the land or water beneath. The landing of an aircraft on the land or waters of
another, without his or her consent, is unlawful except in the case of a forced landing or pursuant to
Section 21662.1. The owner, lessee, or operator of the aircraft is liable, as provided by law, for
damages caused by a forced landing.
(b) The landing, takeoff, or taxiing of an aircraft on a public freeway, highway, road, or street is unlawful
except in the following cases:
(1) A forced landing.
(2) A landing during a natural disaster or other public emergency if the landing has received prior
approval from the public agency having primary jurisdiction over traffic upon the freeway,
highway, road, or street.
(3) When the landing, takeoff, or taxiing has received prior approval from the public agency having
primary jurisdiction over traffic upon the freeway, highway, road or street.
The prosecution bears the burden of proving that none of the exceptions apply to the act which is
alleged to be unlawful.
(c) The right of flight in aircraft includes the right of safe access to public airports, which includes the
right of flight within the zone of approach of any public airport without restriction or hazard. The
zone of approach of an airport shall conform to the specifications of Part 77 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation.
Page 299 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–17
AERONAUTICS LAW
PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
Division 9, Part 1
Chapter 4—Airports and Air Navigation Facilities
Article 2.7—Regulation of Obstructions
(excerpts)
21655. Proposed Site for Construction of State Building Within Two Miles of Airport
Boundary
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if the proposed site of any state building or other enclosure
is within two miles, measured by air line, of that point on an airport runway, or runway proposed by an
airport master plan, which is nearest the site, the state agency or office which proposes to construct the
building or other enclosure shall, before acquiring title to property for the new state building or other
enclosure site or for an addition to a present site, notify the Department of Transportation, in writing, of
the proposed acquisition. The department shall investigate the proposed site and, within 30 working days
after receipt of the notice, shall submit to the state agency or office which proposes to co nstruct the
building or other enclosure a written report of the investigation and its recommendations concerning
acquisition of the site.
If the report of the department does not favor acquisition of the site, no state funds shall be expended
for the acquisition of the new state building or other enclosure site, or the expansion of the present site,
or for the construction of the state building or other enclosure, provided that the provisions of this
section shall not affect title to real property once it is acquired.
21658. Construction of Utility Pole or Line in Vicinity of Aircraft Landing Area
No public utility shall construct any pole, pole line, distribution or transmission tower, or tower line, or
substation structure in the vicinity of the exterior boundary of an aircraft landing area of any airport open
to public use, in a location with respect to the airport and at a height so as to constitute an obstruction
to air navigation, as an obstruction is defined in accordance with Part 77 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations, Federal Aviation Administration, or any corresponding rules or regulations of the Federal
Aviation Administration, unless the Federal Aviation Administration has determined that the pole, line,
tower, or structure does not constitute a hazard to air navigation. This section shall not apply to existing
poles, lines, towers, or structures or to the repair, replacement, or reconstruction thereof if the original
height is not materially exceeded and this section shall not apply unless just compensation shall have first
been paid to the public utility by the owner of any airport for any property or property rights which would
be taken or damaged hereby.
21659. Hazards Near Airports Prohibited
(a) No person shall construct or alter any structure or permit any natural growth to grow at a height
which exceeds the obstruction standards set forth in the regulations of the Federal Aviation
Administration relating to objects affecting navigable airspace contained in Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 77, Subpart C, unless a permit allowing the construction, alteration, or
growth is issued by the department.
Page 300 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–18 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(b) The permit is not required if the Federal Aviation Administration has determined that the
construction, alteration, or growth does not constitute a hazard to air navigation or would not create
an unsafe condition for air navigation. Subdivision (a) does not apply to a pole, pole line, distribution
or transmission tower, or tower line or substation of a public utility.
(c) Section 21658 is applicable to subdivision (b).
Page 301 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–19
AERONAUTICS LAW
PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
Division 9, Part 1, Chapter 4
Article 3—Regulation of Airports
(excerpts)
21661.5. City Council or Board of Supervisors and ALUC Approvals
(a) No political subdivision, any of its officers or employees, or any person may submit any application
for the construction of a new airport to any local, regional, state, or federal agency unless the plan
for construction is first approved by the board of supervisors of the county, or the city council of
the city, in which the airport is to be located and unless the plan is submitted to the appropriate
commission exercising powers pursuant to Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 21670) of Chapter
4 of Part 1 of Division 9, and acted upon by that commission in accordance with the provisions of
that article.
(b) A county board of supervisors or a city council may, pursuant to Section 65100 of the Government
Code, delegate its responsibility under this section for the approval of a plan for construction of new
helicopter landing and takeoff areas, to the county or city planning agency.
21664.5. Amended Airport Permits; Airport Expansion Defined
(a) An amended airport permit shall be required for every expansion of an existing airport. An applicant
for an amended airport permit shall comply with each requirement of this article pertaining to
permits for new airports. The department may by regulation provide for exemptions from the
operation of this section pursuant to Section 21661, except that no exemption shall be made limiting
the applicability of subdivision (e) of Section 21666, pertaining to environmental considerations,
including the requirement for public hearings in connection therewith.
(b) As used in this section, “airport expansion” includes any of the following:
(1) The acquisition of runway protection zones, as defined in Federal Aviation Administration
Advisory Circular 150/1500-13, or of any interest in land for the purpose of any other expansion
as set forth in this section.
(2) The construction of a new runway.
(3) The extension or realignment of an existing runway.
(4) Any other expansion of the airport’s physical facilities for the purpose of accomplishing or
which are related to the purpose of paragraph (1), (2), or (3).
(c) This section does not apply to any expansion of an existing airport if the expansion commenced on
or prior to the effective date of this section and the expansion met the approval, on or prior to that
effective date, of each governmental agency that required the approval by law.
Page 302 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–20 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
PLANNING AND ZONING LAW
GOVERNMENT CODE
Title 7—Planning and Land Use
Division 1—Planning and Zoning
Chapter 3—Local Planning
Article 5—Authority for and Scope of General Plans
(excerpts)
65302.3. General and Applicable Specific Plans; Consistency with Airport Land Use Plans;
Amendment; Nonconcurrence Findings
(a) The general plan, and any applicable specific plan prepared pursuant to Article 8 (commencing with
Section 65450), shall be consistent with the plan adopted or amended pursuant to Section 21675 of
the Public Utilities Code.
(b) The general plan, and any applicable specific plan, shall be amended, as necessary, within 180 days
of any amendment to the plan required under Section 21675 of the Public Utilities Code.
(c) If the legislative body does not concur with any provision of the plan required under Section 21675
of the Public Utilities Code, it may satisfy the provisions of this section by adopting findings pursuant
to Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code.
(d) In each county where an airport land use commission does not exist, but where there is a military
airport, the general plan, and any applicable specific plan prepared pursuant to Article 8
(commencing with Section 65450), shall be consistent with the safety and noise standards in the Air
Installation Compatible Use Zone prepared for that military airport.
Page 303 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–21
PLANNING AND ZONING LAW
GOVERNMENT CODE
Title 7, Division 1
Chapter 4.5—Review and Approval of Development Projects
Article 3—Application for Development Projects
(excerpts)
Note: The following government code sections are referenced in Section 21675.2(c) of the ALUC statutes.
65943. Completeness of Application; Determination; Time; Specification of Parts not
Complete and Manner of Completion
(a) Not later than 30 calendar days after any public agency has received an application for a development
project, the agency shall determine in writing whether the application is complete and shall
immediately transmit the determination to the applicant for the development project. If the written
determination is not made within 30 days after receipt of the application, and the application includes
a statement that it is an application for a development permit, the application shall be deemed
complete for purposes of this chapter. Upon receipt of any resubmittal of the application, a new 30-
day period shall begin, during which the public agency shall determine the completeness of the
application. If the application is determined not to be complete, the agency’s determination shall
specify those parts of the application which are incomplete and shall indicate the manner in which
they can be made complete, including a list and thorough description of the specific information
needed to complete the application. The applicant shall submit materials to the public agency in
response to the list and description.
(b) Not later than 30 calendar days after receipt of the submitted materials, the public agency shall
determine in writing whether they are complete and shall immediately transmit that determination
to the applicant. If the written determination is not made within that 30-day period, the application
together with the submitted materials shall be deemed complete for purposes of this chapter.
(c) If the application together with the submitted materials are determined not to be complete pursuant
to subdivision (b), the public agency shall provide a process for the applicant to appeal that decision
in writing to the governing body of the agency or, if there is no governing body, to the director of
the agency, as provided by that agency. A city or county shall provide that the right of appeal is to
the governing body or, at their option, the planning commission, or both.
There shall be a final written determination by the agency on the appeal not later than 60 calendar
days after receipt of the applicant’s written appeal. The fact that an appeal is permitted to both the
planning commission and to the governing body does not extend the 60-day period.
Notwithstanding a decision pursuant to subdivision (b) that the application and submitted materials
are not complete, if the final written determination on the appeal is not made within that 60-day
period, the application with the submitted materials shall be deemed complete for the purposes of
this chapter.
(d) Nothing in this section precludes an applicant and a public agency from mutually agreeing to an
extension of any time limit provided by this section.
Page 304 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–22 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(e) A public agency may charge applicants a fee not to exceed the amount reasonably necessary to
provide the service required by this section. If a fee is charged pursuant to this section, the fee shall
be collected as part of the application fee charged for the development permit.
(f) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2025.
(Repealed (in Sec. 9) and added by Stats. 2019, Ch. 654, Sec. 10. (SB 330) Effective January 1, 2020.
Section operative January 1, 2025, by its own provisions.)
65943.5.
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, any appeal pursuant to subdivision (c) of
Section 65943 involving a permit application to a board, office, or department within the California
Environmental Protection Agency shall be made to the Secretary for Environmental Protection.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, any appeal pursuant to subdivision (c) of
Section 65943 involving an application for the issuance of an environmental permit from an en-
vironmental agency shall be made to the Secretary for Environmental Protection under either of the
following circumstances:
(1) The environmental agency has not adopted an appeals process pursuant to subdivision (c) of
Section 65943.
(2) The environmental agency declines to accept an appeal for a decision pursuant to subdivision
(c) of Section 65943.
(c) For purposes of subdivision (b), “environmental permit” has the same meaning as defined in Section
71012 of the Public Resources Code, and “environmental agency” has the same meaning as defined
in Section 71011 of the Public Resources Code, except that “environmental agency” does not include
the agencies described in subdivisions (c) and (h) of Section 71011 of the Public Resources Code.
65944. Acceptance of Application as Complete; Requests for Additional Information;
Restrictions; Clarification, Amplification, Correction, etc; Prior to Notice of
Necessary Information
(a) After a public agency accepts an application as complete, the agency shall not subsequently re quest
of an applicant any new or additional information which was not specified in the list prepared
pursuant to Section 65940. The agency may, in the course of processing the application, request the
applicant to clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the information required for the
application.
(b) The provisions of subdivision (a) shall not be construed as requiring an applicant to submit with an
initial application the entirety of the information which a public agency may require in order to take
final action on the application. Prior to accepting an application, each public agency shall inform the
applicant of any information included in the list prepared pursuant to Section 65940 which will
subsequently be required from the applicant in order to complete final action on the application.
(c) This section shall not be construed as limiting the ability of a public agency to request and obtain
information which may be needed in order to comply with the provisions of Division 13
(commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code.
(d) (1) After a public agency accepts an application as complete, and if the project applicant has
Page 305 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–23
identified that the proposed project is located within 1,000 feet of a military installation or within
special use airspace or beneath a low-level flight path in accordance with Section 65940, the
public agency shall provide notice of the complete application to any branch of the United
States Armed Forces that has provided the Office of Planning and Research with points of
contact to receive the notice.
(2) Except for a project within 1,000 feet of a military installation, the public agency is not required
to provide a copy of the application if the project is located entirely in an “urbanized area.” An
urbanized area is any urban location that meets the definition used by the United State
Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Census for “urban” and includes locations with core
census block groups containing at least 1,000 people per square mile and surrounding census
block groups containing at least 500 people per square mile.
(e) After providing notice of the application as required in subdivision (d), and if requested by any
branch of the United States Armed Forces, the public agency and the project applicant shall consult
with the impacted military branch or branches to discuss the effects of the proposed project on
military installations, low-level flight paths, or special use airspace, and potential alternatives and
mitigation measures.
(f) The Office of Planning and Research shall maintain on its internet website and provide notice to
public agencies all of the following:
(1) Maps of low-level flight paths, special use airspace, and military installations.
(2) The military points of contact to receive notifications pursuant to subdivision (d).
(3) The information required in the notice of a completed application pursuant to subdivision (d).
This information shall include, at a minimum, all of the following:
(A) The project’s specific location.
(B) The major physical alterations to the property on which the project will be located.
(C) A site place showing the location of the project on the property, as well as the massing,
height, and approximate square footage, of each building that will be occupied.
(D) The proposed land uses by number of units or square feet using the categories in the
applicable zoning ordinance.
(Amended by Stats. 2019, Ch. 142, Sec. 3. (SB 242) Effective January 1, 2020.)
65945. Notice of Proposal to Adopt or Amend Certain Plans or Ordinances by City or
County, Fee; Subscription to Periodically Updated Notice as Alternative, Fee
(a) At the time of filing an application for a development permit with a city or county, the city or county
shall inform the applicant that he or she may make a written request to receive notice from the city
or county of a proposal to adopt or amend any of the following plans or ordinances:
(1) A general plan.
(2) A specific plan.
(3) A zoning ordinance.
(4) An ordinance affecting building permits or grading permits.
Page 306 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–24 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
The applicant shall specify, in the written request, the types of proposed action for which notice is
requested. Prior to taking any of those actions, the city or county shall give notice to any applicant
who has requested notice of the type of action proposed and whose development project is pending
before the city or county if the city or county determines that the proposal is reasonably related to
the applicant’s request for the development permit. Notice shall be given only for those types of
actions which the applicant specifies in the request for notification.
The city or county may charge the applicant for a development permit, to whom notice is provided
pursuant to this subdivision, a reasonable fee not to exceed the actual cost of providing that notice.
If a fee is charged pursuant to this subdivision, the fee shall be collected as part of the application
fee charged for the development permit.
(b) As an alternative to the notification procedure prescribed by subdivision (a), a city or county may
inform the applicant at the time of filing an application for a development permit that he or she may
subscribe to a periodically updated notice or set of notices from the city or county which lists pending
proposals to adopt or amend any of the plans or ordinances specified in subdivision (a), together
with the status of the proposal and the date of any hearings thereon which have been set.
Only those proposals which are general, as opposed to parcel-specific in nature, and which the city
or county determines are reasonably related to requests for development permits, need be listed in
the notice. No proposal shall be required to be listed until such time as the first public hearing
thereon has been set. The notice shall be updated and mailed at least once every six weeks; except
that a notice need not be updated and mailed until a change in its contents is required.
The city or county may charge the applicant for a development permit, to whom notice is provided
pursuant to this subdivision, a reasonable fee not to exceed the actual cost of providing that notice,
including the costs of updating the notice, for the length of time the applicant requests to be sent
the notice or notices.
65945.3. Notice of Proposal to Adopt or Amend Rules or Regulations Affecting Issuance of
Permits by Local Agency other than City or County; Fee
At the time of filing an application for a development permit with a local agency, other than a city or
county, the local agency shall inform the applicant that he or she may make a written request to receive
notice of any proposal to adopt or amend a rule or regulation affecting the issuance of development
permits.
Prior to adopting or amending any such rule or regulation, the local agency shall give notice to any
applicant who has requested such notice and whose development project is pending before the agency if
the local agency determines that the proposal is reasonably related to the applicant’s request for the
development permit.
The local agency may charge the applicant for a development permit, to whom notic e is provided
pursuant to this section, a reasonable fee not to exceed the actual cost of providing that notice. If a fee
is charged pursuant to this section, the fee shall be collected as part of the application fee charged for the
development permit.
Page 307 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–25
65945.5. Notice of Proposal to Adopt or Amend Regulation Affecting Issuance of Permits
and Which Implements Statutory Provision by State Agency
At the time of filing an application for a development permit with a state agency, the state agency shall
inform the applicant that he or she may make a written request to receive notice of any proposal to adopt
or amend a regulation affecting the issuance of development permits and which implements a statutory
provision.
Prior to adopting or amending any such regulation, the state agency shall give notice to any applicant who
has requested such notice and whose development project is pending before the state agency if the state
agency determines that the proposal is reasonably related to the applicant’s request for the development
permit.
65945.7. Actions, Inactions, or Recommendations Regarding Ordinances, Rules or
Regulations; Invalidity or Setting Aside Ground of Error Only if Prejudicial
No action, inaction, or recommendation regarding any ordinance, rule, or regulation subject to this
Section 65945, 65945.3, or 65945.5 by any legislative body, administrative body, or the officials of any
state or local agency shall be held void or invalid or be set aside by any court on the ground of any error,
irregularity, informality, neglect or omission (hereinafter called “error”) as to any matter pertaining to
notices, records, determinations, publications or any matters of procedure whatever, unless after an
examination of the entire case, including evidence, the court shall be of the opinion that the error
complained of was prejudicial, and that by reason of such error the party complaining or appealing
sustained and suffered substantial injury, and that a different result would have been probable if such
error had not occurred or existed. There shall be no presumption that error is prejudicial or that injury
was done if error is shown.
65946. [Replaced by AB2351 Statutes of 1993]
Page 308 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–26 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
PLANNING AND ZONING LAW
GOVERNMENT CODE
Title 7, Division 1
Chapter 9.3—Mediation and Resolution of Land Use Disputes
(excerpts)
66030.
(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(1) Current law provides that aggrieved agencies, project proponents, and affected residents may
bring suit against the land use decisions of state and l ocal governmental agencies. In practical
terms, nearly anyone can sue once a project has been approved.
(2) Contention often arises over projects involving local general plans and zoning, redevelopment
plans, the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000)
of the Public Resources Code), development impact fees, annexations and in corporations, and
the Permit Streamlining Act (Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 65920)).
(3) When a public agency approves a development project that is not in accordance with the law,
or when the prerogative to bring suit is abused, lawsuits can delay development, add uncertainty
and cost to the development process, make housing more expensive, and damage California’s
competitiveness. This litigation begins in the superior court, and often progresses on appeal to
the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, adding to the workload of the state’s already
overburdened judicial system.
(b) It is, therefore, the intent of the Legislature to help litigants resolve their differences by establishing
formal mediation processes for land use disputes. In establishing these mediation processes, it is not
the intent of the Legislature to interfere with the ability of litigants to pursue remedies through the
courts.
66031.
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any action brought in the superior court relating to any
of the following subjects may be subject to a mediation proceeding conducted pursuant to this
chapter:
(1) The approval or denial by a public agency of any development project.
(2) Any act or decision of a public agency made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).
(3) The failure of a public agency to meet the time limits specified in Chapter 4.5 (commencing
with Section 65920), commonly known as the Permit Streamlining Act, or in the Subdivision
Map Act (Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410)).
(4) Fees determined pursuant to Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 17620) of Division 1 of Part
10.5 of the Education Code or Chapter 4.9 (commencing with Section 65995).
(5) Fees determined pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (Chapter 5 (commencing with Section
66000), Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 66010), Chapter 7 (commencing with Section
Page 309 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–27
66012), Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 66016), and Chapter 9 (commencing with Section
66020)).
(6) The adequacy of a general plan or specific plan adopted pursuant to Chapter 3 (commencing
with Section 65100).
(7) The validity of any sphere of influence, urban service area, change of organization or
reorganization, or any other decision made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local
Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Division 3 (commencing with Section 56000) of Title
5).
(8) The adoption or amendment of a redevelopment plan pursuant to the Community
Redevelopment Law (Part 1 (commencing with Section 33000) of Division 24 of the Health
and Safety Code).
(9) The validity of any zoning decision made pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section
65800).
(10) The validity of any decision made pursuant to Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 21670) of
Chapter 4 of Part 1 of Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code.
(b) Within five days after the deadline for the respondent or defendant to file its reply to an action, the
court may invite the parties to consider resolving their dispute by selecting a mutually acceptable
person to serve as a mediator, or an organization or agency to provide a mediator.
(c) In selecting a person to serve as a mediator, or an organization or agency to provide a mediator, the
parties shall consider the following:
(1) The council of governments having jurisdiction in the county where the dispute arose.
(2) Any subregional or countywide council of governments in the county where the dispute arose.
(3) Any other person with experience or training in mediation including those with experience in
land use issues, or any other organization or agency that can provide a person with experience
or training in mediation, including those with experience in land use issues.
(d) If the court invites the parties to consider mediation, the parties shall notify the court within 30 days
if they have selected a mutually acceptable person to serve as a mediator. If the parties have not
selected a mediator within 30 days, the action shall proceed. The court shall not draw any implication,
favorable or otherwise, from the refusal by a party to accept the invitation by the court to consider
mediation. Nothing in this section shall preclude the parties from using mediation at any other time
while the action is pending.
Page 310 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–28 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
PLANNING AND ZONING LAW
GOVERNMENT CODE
Title 7—Planning and Land Use
Division 2—Subdivisions
Chapter 3—Procedure
Article 3—Review of Tentative Map by Other Agencies
(excerpts)
66455.9.
Whenever there is consideration of an area within a development for a public schoolsite, the advisory
agency shall give the affected districts and the State Department of Education written notice of the
proposed site. The written notice shall include the identification of any existing or proposed runways
within the distance specified in Section 17215 of the Education Code. If the site is within the distance of
an existing or proposed airport runway as described in Section 17215 of the Education Code, the
department shall notify the State Department of Transportation as required by the section and the site
shall be investigated by the State Department of Transportation required by Section 17215.
Page 311 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–29
EDUCATION CODE
Title 1—General Education Code Provisions
Division 1—General Education Code Provisions
Part 10.5—School Facilities
Chapter 1—School Sites
Article 1—General Provisions
(excerpts)
17215.
(a) In order to promote the safety of pupils, comprehensive community planning, and greater
educational usefulness of schoolsites, before acquiring title to or leasing property for a new
schoolsite, the governing board of each school district, including any district governed by a city board
of education, or a charter school, shall give the State Department of Education written notice of the
proposed acquisition or lease and shall submit any information required by the State Department of
Education if the site is within two miles, measured by air line, of that point on an airport runway or
a potential runway included in an airport master plan that is nearest to the site.
(b) Upon receipt of the notice required pursuant to subdivision (a), the State Department of Education
shall notify the Department of Transportation in writing of the proposed acquisition or lease. If the
Department of Transportation is no longer in operation, the State Department of Education shall,
in lieu of notifying the Department of Transportation, notify the United States Department of
Transportation or any other appropriate agency, in writing, of the proposed acquisition or lease for
the purpose of obtaining from the department or other agency any information or assistance that it
may desire to give.
(c) The Department of Transportation shall investigate the site and, within 30 working days after receipt
of the notice, shall submit to the State Department of Education a written report of its findings
including recommendations concerning acquisition or lease of the site. As part of the investigation,
the Department of Transportation shall give notice thereof to the owner and operator of the airport
who shall be granted the opportunity to comment upon the site. The Department of Transportation
shall adopt regulations setting forth the criteria by which a site will be evaluated pursuant to this
section.
(d) The State Department of Education shall, within 10 days of receiving t he Department of
Transportation’s report, forward the report to the governing board of the school district or charter
school. The governing board or charter school may not acquire title to or lease the property until the
report of the Department of Transportation has been received. If the report does not favor the
acquisition or lease of the property for a schoolsite or an addition to a present schoolsite, the
governing board or charter school may not acquire title to or lease the property. If the report does
favor the acquisition or lease of the property for a schoolsite or an addition to a present schoolsite,
the governing board or charter school shall hold a public hearing on the matter prior to acquiring or
leasing the site.
(e) If the Department of Transportation’s recommendation does not favor acquisition or lease of the
proposed site, state funds or local funds may not be apportioned or expended for the acquisition or
lease of that site, construction of any school building on that site, or for the expansion of any existing
site to include that site.
(f) This section does not apply to sites acquired prior to January 1, 1966, nor to any additions or
extensions to those sites.
Page 312 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–30 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
EDUCATION CODE
Title 3—Postsecondary Education
Division 7—Community Colleges
Part 49—Community Colleges, Education Facilities
Chapter 1—School Sites
Article 2—School Sites
(excerpts)
81033. Investigation: Geologic and Soil Engineering Studies; Airport in Proximity
(c) To promote the safety of students, comprehensive community planning, and greater educational
usefulness of community college sites, the governing board of each community college district, if the
proposed site is within two miles, measured by air line, of that point on an airport runway, or runway
proposed by an airport master plan, which is nearest the site and excluding them if the property is
not so located, before acquiring title to property for a new community college site or for an addition
to a present site, shall give the board of governors notice in writing of the proposed acquisition and
shall submit any information required by the board of governors.
Immediately after receiving notice of the proposed acquisition of property which is within two miles,
measured by air line, of that point on an airport runway, or runway proposed by an airport master
plan, which is nearest the site, the board of governors shall notify the Division of Aeronautics of the
Department of Transportation, in writing, of the proposed acquisition. The Division of Aeronautics
shall make an investigation and report to the board of governors within 30 working days after receipt
of the notice. If the Division of Aeronautics is no longer in operation, the board of governors, in
lieu of notifying the Division of Aeronautics, shall notify the Federal Aviation Administration or any
other appropriate agency, in writing, of the proposed acquisition for the purpose of obtaining from
the authority or other agency any information or assistance it may desire to give.
The board of governors shall investigate the proposed site and, within 35 working days after receipt
of the notice, shall submit to the governing board a written report and its recommendations
concerning acquisition of the site. The governing board shall not acquire title to the property until
the report of the board of governors has been received. If the report does not favor the acquisition
of the property for a community college site or an addition to a present community college site, the
governing board shall not acquire title to the property until 30 days after the department’s report is
received and until the board of governors’ report has been read at a public hearing duly called after
10 days’ notice published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the community college
district, or if there is no such newspaper, then in a newspaper of general circulation within the county
in which the property is located.
(d) If, with respect to a proposed site located within two miles of an operative airport runway, the report
of the board of governors submitted to a community college district governing board under
subdivision (c) does not favor the acquisition of the site on the sole or partial basis of the unfavorable
recommendation of the Division of Aeronautics of the Department of Transportation, no state
agency or officer shall grant, apportion, or allow to that community college district for expenditure
in connection with that site, any state funds otherwise made available under any state law whatever
for community college site acquisition or college building construction, or for expansion of existing
sites and buildings, and no funds of the community college district or of the county in which the
Page 313 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–31
district lies shall be expended for those purposes; However, this section shall not be applicable to
sites acquired prior to January 1, 1966, or to any additions or extensions to those sites.
If the recommendation of the Division of Aeronautics is unfavorable, the recommendation shall not
be overruled without the express approval of the board of governors and the State Allocation Board.
Page 314 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–32 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT STATUTES
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE
Division 13—Environmental Quality
Chapter 2.6—General
(excerpts)
21096. Airport Planning
(a) If a lead agency prepares an environmental impact report for a project situated within airport land
use compatibility plan boundaries, or, if an airport land use compatibility plan has not been adopted,
for a project within two nautical miles of a public airport or public use airport, the Airport Land Use
Planning Handbook published by the Division of Aeronautics of the Department of Transportation,
in compliance with Section 21674.5 of the Public Utilities Code and other documents, shall be
utilized as technical resources to assist in the preparation of the environmental impact report as the
report relates to airport-related safety hazards and noise problems.
(b) A lead agency shall not adopt a negative declaration for a project described in subdivision (a) unless
the lead agency considers whether the project will result in a safety hazard or noise problem for
persons using the airport or for persons residing or working in the project area.
Page 315 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–33
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
Division 4—Real Estate
Part 2—Regulation of Transactions
Chapter 1—Subdivided Lands
Article 2—Investigation, Regulation and Report
(excerpts)
11010.
(a) Except as otherwise provided pursuant to subdivision (c) or elsewhere in this chapter, any person
who intends to offer subdivided lands within this state for sale or lease shall file with the Bureau of
Real Estate an application for a public report consisting of a notice of intention and a completed
questionnaire on a form prepared by the bureau.
(b) The notice of intention shall contain the following information about the subdivided lands and the
proposed offering:
[Sub-Sections (1) through (12) omitted]
(13) (A) The location of all existing airports, and of all proposed airports shown on the general plan
of any city or county, located within two statute miles of the subdivision. If the property is
located within an airport influence area, the following statement shall be included in the
notice of intention:
NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY
This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an
airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the
annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for
example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances, if any,
are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine
whether they are acceptable to you.
(B) For purposes of this section, an “airport influence area,” also known as an “airport referral
area,” is the area in which current or future airport-related noise, overflight, safety, or
airspace protection factors may significantly affect land uses or necessitate restrictions on
those uses as determined by an airport land use commission.
Page 316 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–34 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
CIVIL CODE
Division 2—Property
Part 4—Acquisition of Property
Title 4—Transfer
Chapter 2—Transfer of Real Property
Article 1.7—Disclosure of Natural Hazards Upon Transfer of Residential Property
(excerpts)
1103.
(a) For purpose of this article, the definitions in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 10000) of Part 1
of Division 4 of the Business and Professions Code shall apply.
(b) Except as provided in Section 1103.1, this article applies to a sale, exchange, real property sales
contract, as defined in Section 2985, lease with an option to purchase, any other option to purchase,
or ground lease coupled with improvements, of any single-family residential real property.
(c) This article shall apply to the transactions described in subdivision (b) only if the seller or his or her
agent is required by one or more of the following to disclose the property’s location within a hazard
zone:
(1) A seller’s agent for a seller of real property that is located within a special flood hazard area (any type
Zone “A” or “V”) designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or the seller if the
seller is acting without a seller’s agent, shall disclose to any prospective buyer the fact that the
property is located within a special flood hazard area if either:
(A) The seller, or the seller’s agent, has actual knowledge that the property is within a special flood hazard
area.
(B) The local jurisdiction has compiled a list, by parcel, of properties that are within the special flood
hazard area and a notice has been posted at the offices of the county recorder, county assessor, and
county planning agency that identifies the location of the parcel list.
(2) … located within an area of potential flooding… shall disclose to any prospective buyer the fact that
the property is located within an area of potential flooding if either:
(3) … is located within a very high fire hazard severity zone, designated pursuant to Section 51178 of the
Government Code… shall disclose to any prospective buyer the fact that the property is located
within a very high fire hazard severity zone and is subject to the requirements of Section 51182…
(4) … is located within an earthquake fault zone, designated pursuant to Section 2622 of the Public
Resources Code… shall disclose to any prospective buyer the fact that the property is located within
a delineated earthquake fault zone…
regarding changes to the map received by the county.
(5) … is located within a seismic hazard zone, designated pursuant to Section 2696 of the Public
Resources Code, or the seller if the seller is acting without an agent, shall disclose to any prospective
buyer the fact that the property is located within a seismic hazard…
(6) …is located within a state responsibility area determined by the board, pursuant to Section 4125 of
the Public Resources Code, or the seller’s agent, shall disclose to any prospective buyer the fact that
Page 317 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–35
the property is located within a wildland area that may contain substantial forest fire risks and hazards
and is subject to the requirements of Section 4291 of the Public Resources Code…
(d) Any waiver of the requirements of this article is void as against public policy.
(Amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 907, Sec. 20. (AB 1289) Effective January 1, 2019.)1103.1.
(a) This article does not apply to the following sales:
(1) Sales or transfers pursuant to court order, including, but not limited to, sales ordered by a probate
court in administration of an estate, sales pursuant to a writ of execution, sales by any foreclosure
sale, sales by a trustee in bankruptcy, sales by eminent domain, and sales resulting from a decree for
specific performance.
(2) Sales or transfers to a mortgagee by a mortgagor or successor in interest who is in default, sales to a
beneficiary of a deed of trust by a trustor or successor in interest who is in default, transfers by any
foreclosure sale after default, any foreclosure sale after default in an obligation secured by a mortgage,
sale under a power of sale or any foreclosure sale under a decree of foreclosure after default in an
obligation secured by a deed of trust or secured by any other instrument containing a power of sale,
or sales by a mortgagee or a beneficiary under a deed of trust who has acquired the real property at
a sale conducted pursuant to a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust or a sale pursuant to
a decree of foreclosure or has acquired the real property by a deed in lieu of foreclosure.
(3) Sales or transfers by a fiduciary in the course of the administration of a trust, guardianship,
conservatorship, or decedent’s estate. This exemption shall not apply to a sale if the trustee is a
natural person who is a trustee of a revocable trust and the seller is a former owner of the property
or an occupant in possession of the property within the preceding year.
(4) Sales or transfers from one coowner to one or more other coowners.
(5) Sales or transfers made to a spouse, or to a person or persons in the lineal line of consanguinity of
one or more of the sellers.
(6) Sales or transfers between spouses resulting from a judgment of dissolution of marriage or of legal
separation of the parties or from a property settlement agreement incidental to that judgment.
(7) Sales or transfers by the Controller in the course of administering Chapter 7 (commencing with
Section 1500) of Title 10 of Part 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(8) Sales or transfers under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 3691) or Chapter 8 (commencing with
Section 3771) of Part 6 of Division 1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
(9) Sales, transfers, or exchanges to or from any governmental entity.
(10) The sale, creation, or transfer of any lease of any duration except a lease with an option to purchase
or a ground lease coupled with improvements.
(b) Sales and transfers not subject to this article may be subject to other disclosure requirements, including
those under Sections 8589.3, 8589.4, and 51183.5 of the Government Code and Sections 2621.9,
2694, and 4136 of the Public Resources Code. In sales not subject to this article, agents may make
required disclosures in a separate writing.
(c) Notwithstanding the definition of sale in Section 10018.5 of the Business and Professions Code and
Section 2079.13, the terms “sale” and “transfer,” as they are used in this section, shall have their
commonly understood meanings. The changes made to this section by Assembly Bill 1289 of the
Page 318 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–36 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
2017–18 Legislative Session shall not be interpreted to change the application of the law as it read
prior to January 1, 2019.
(Amended by Stats. 2019, Ch. 310, Sec. 7. (AB 892) Effective January 1, 2020.)1103.2.
(a) The disclosures required by this article are set forth in, and shall be made on a copy of, the following
Natural Hazard Disclosure Statement: [content omitted].
(b) If an earthquake fault zone, seismic hazard zone, very high fire hazard severity zone, or wildland fire
area map or accompanying information is not of sufficient accuracy or scale that a reasonable person
can determine if the subject real property is included in a natural hazard area, the seller or seller’s
agent shall mark “Yes” on the Natural Hazard Disclosure Statement. The seller’s agent may mark
“No” on the Natural Hazard Disclosure Statement if the seller attaches a report prepared pursuant
to subdivision (c) of Section 1103.4 that verifies the property is not in the hazard zone. This
subdivision is not intended to limit or abridge any existing duty of the seller or the seller’s agents to
exercise reasonable care in making a determination under this subdivision.
[Sub-Sections (c) through (h) omitted]
[Section 1103.3 omitted]
1103.4.
(a) Neither the seller nor any seller’s agent or buyer’s agent shall be liable for any error, inaccuracy, or
omission of any information delivered pursuant to this article if the error, inaccuracy, or omission
was not within the personal knowledge of the seller or the seller’s agent or buyer’s agent and was
based on information timely provided by public agencies or by other persons providing information
as specified in subdivision (c) that is required to be disclosed pursuant to this article, and ordinary
care was exercised in obtaining and transmitting the information.
(b) The delivery of any information required to be disclosed by this article to a prospective buyer by a
public agency or other person providing information required to be disclosed pursuant to this article
shall be deemed to comply with the requirements of this article and shall relieve the seller, seller’s
agent, and buyer’s agent of any further duty under this article with respect to that item of information.
(c) The delivery of a report or opinion prepared by a licensed engineer, land surveyor, geologist, or
expert in natural hazard discovery dealing with matters within the scope of the professional’s license
or expertise, shall be sufficient compliance for application of the exemption provided by subdivision
(a) if the information is provided to the prospective buyer pursuant to a request therefor, whether
written or oral. In responding to that request, an expert may indicate, in writing, an understanding
that the information provided will be used in fulfilling the requirements of Section 1103.2 and, if so,
shall indicate the required disclosures, or parts thereof, to which the information being furnished is
applicable. Where such a statement is furnished, the expert shall not be responsible for any items of
information, or parts thereof, other than those expressly set forth in the statement.
(1) In responding to the request, the expert shall determine whether the property is within an airport
influence area as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 11010 of the Business and Professions
Code. If the property is within an airport influence area, the report shall contain the following
statement:
Page 319 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–37
NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY
This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as
an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the
annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for
example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can
vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if
any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and
determine whether they are acceptable to you.
[Remainder of Article 1.7 omitted]
Page 320 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–38 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
CIVIL CODE
Division 4
Part 5—Common Interest Developments
Chapter 3—Governing Documents
Article 2—Declaration
(excerpts)
4250.
(a) A declaration, recorded on or after January 1, 1986, shall contain a legal description of the
common interest development, and a statement that the common interest development is a
community apartment project, condominium project, planned development, stock cooperative,
or combination thereof. The declaration shall additionally set forth the name of the association
and the restrictions on the use or enjoyment of any portion of the common interest
development that are intended to be enforceable equitable servitudes.
(b) The declaration may contain any other matters the declarant or the members consider
appropriate.
4255.
(a) If a common interest development is located within an airport influence area, a declaration,
recorded after January 1, 2004, shall contain the following statement:
NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY
This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as
an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the
annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for
example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can
vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if
any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and
determine whether they are acceptable to you.
(b) For purposes of this section, an “airport influence area,” also known as an “airport referral
area,” is the area in which current or future airport-related noise, overflight, safety, or airspace
protection factors may significantly affect land uses or necessitate restrictions on those uses as
determined by an airport land use commission.
(c) [Omitted]
(d) The statement in a declaration acknowledging that a property is located in an airport influence
area … does not constitute a title defect, lien, or encumbrance.
4260.
Except to the extent that a declaration provides by its express terms that it is not amendable, in whole or
in part, a declaration that fails to include provisions permitting its amendment at all times during its
existence may be amended at any time.
Page 321 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–39
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY SUMMARY1
PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
Sections 21670 et seq.
Airport Land Use Commission Statutes
And Related Statutes
1967 Original ALUC statute enacted.
▪ Establishment of ALUCs required in each county containing a public airport served by a
certificated air carrier.
▪ The purpose of ALUCs is indicated as being to make recommendations regarding height
restrictions on buildings and the use of land surrounding airports.
1970 Assembly Bill 1856 (Badham) Chapter 1182, Statutes of 1970—Adds provisions which:
▪ Require ALUCs to prepare comprehensive land use plans.
▪ Require such plans to include a long-range plan and to reflect the airport’s forecast growth
during the next 20 years.
▪ Require ALUC review of airport construction plans (Section 21661.5).
▪ Exempt Los Angeles County from the requirement of establishing an ALUC.
1971 The function of ALUCs is restated as being to require new construction to conform to
Department of Aeronautics standards.
1973 ALUCs are permitted to establish compatibility plans for military airports.
1982 Assembly Bill 2920 (Rogers) Chapter 1041, Statutes of 1982—Adds major changes which:
▪ More clearly articulate the purpose of ALUCs.
▪ Eliminate reference to “achieve by zoning.”
▪ Require consistency between local general and specific plans and airport land use commis-
sion plans; the requirements define the process for attaining consistency, they do not estab-
lish standards for consistency.
▪ Eliminate the requirement for proposed individual development projects to be referred to
an ALUC for review once local general/specific plans are consistent with the ALUC’s plan.
▪ Require that local agencies make findings of fact before overriding an ALUC decision.
▪ Change the vote required for an override from 4/5 to 2/3.
1984 Assembly Bill 3551 (Mountjoy) Chapter 1117, Statutes of 1984—Amends the law to:
▪ Require ALUCs in all counties having an airport which serv es the general public unless a
county and its cities determine an ALUC is not needed.
▪ Limit amendments to compatibility plans to once per year.
▪ Allow individual projects to continue to be referred to the ALUC by agreement.
▪ Extend immunity to airports if an ALUC action is overridden by a local agency not owning
the airport.
1 Source: California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (October 2011)
Page 322 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–40 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
▪ Provide state funding eligibility for preparation of compatibility plans through the Regional
Transportation Improvement Program process.
1987 Senate Bill 633 (Rogers) Chapter 1018, Statutes of 1987—Makes revisions which:
▪ Require that a designated body serving as an ALUC include two members having “expertise
in aviation.”
▪ Allows an interested party to initiate court proceedings to postpone the effective date of a
local land use action if a compatibility plan has not been adopted.
▪ Delete sunset provisions contained in certain clauses of the law. Allows reimbursement for
ALUC costs in accordance with the Commission on State Mandates.
1989 Senate Bill 255 (Bergeson) Chapter 54, Statutes of 1989—
▪ Sets a requirement that comprehensive land use plans be completed by June 1991.
▪ Establishes a method for compelling ALUCs to act on matters submitted for review.
▪ Allows ALUCs to charge fees for review of projects.
▪ Suspends any lawsuits that would stop development until the ALUC adopts its plan or until
June 1, 1991.
1989 Senate Bill 235 (Alquist) Chapter 788, Statutes of 1989—Appropriates $3,672,000 for the
payment of claims to counties seeking reimbursement of costs incurred during fiscal years 1985-
86 through 1989-90 pursuant to state-mandated requirement (Chapter 1117, Statutes of 1984)
for creation of ALUCs in most counties. This statute was repealed in 1993.
1990 Assembly Bill 4164 (Mountjoy) Chapter 1008, Statutes of 1990—Adds section 21674.5 requiring
the Division of Aeronautics to develop and implement a training program for ALUC staffs.
1990 Assembly Bill 4265 (Clute) Chapter 563, Statutes of 1990—With the concurrence of the
Division of Aeronautics, allows ALUCs to use an airport layout plan, rather than a long-range
airport master plan, as the basis for preparation of a compatibility plan.
1990 Senate Bill 1288 (Beverly) Chapter 54, Statutes of 1990—Amends Section 21670.2 to give Los
Angeles County additional time to prepare compatibility plans and meet other provisions of the
ALUC statutes.
1991 Senate Bill 532 (Bergeson) Chapter 140, Statutes of 1991—
▪ Allows counties having half of their compatibility plans completed or under preparation by
June 30, 1991, an additional year to complete the remainder.
▪ Allows ALUCs to continue to charge fees under these circumstances.
▪ Fees may be charged only until June 30, 1992, if plans are not completed by then.
1993 Senate Bill 443 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) Chapter 59, Statutes of 1993 —
Amends Section 21670(b) to make the formation of ALUCs permissive rather than mandatory
as of June 30, 1993. (Note: Section 21670.2 which assigns responsibility for coordinating the
airport planning of public agencies in Los Angeles County is not affected by this amendment.)
1994 Assembly Bill 2831 (Mountjoy) Chapter 644, Statutes of 1994 —Reinstates the language in
Section 21670(b) mandating establishment of ALUCs, but also provides for an alternative
airport land use planning process. Lists specific actions which a county and affected cities must
take in order for such alternative process to receive Caltrans approval. Requires that ALUCs be
guided by information in the Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook when formulating
airport land use plans.
Page 323 of 550
STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING APPENDIX A
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) A–41
1994 Senate Bill 1453 (Rogers) Chapter 438, Statutes of 1994 —Amends California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) statutes as applied to preparation of environmental documents affecting
projects in the vicinity of airports. Requires lead agencies to use the Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook as a technical resource when assessing the airport-related noise and safety impacts of
such projects.
1997 Assembly Bill 1130 (Oller) Chapter 81, Statutes of 1997—Added Section 21670.4 concerning
airports whose planning boundary straddles a county line.
2000 Senate Bill 1350 (Rainey) Chapter 506, Statutes of 2000—Added Section 21670(f) clarifying that
special districts are among the local agencies to which airport land use planning laws are
intended to apply.
2001 Assembly Bill 93 (Wayne) Chapter 946, Statutes of 2001—Added Section 21670.3 regarding San
Diego County Regional Airport Authority’s responsibility for airport planning within San Diego
County.
2002 Assembly Bill 3026 (Committee on Transportation) Chapter 438, Sta tutes of 2002—Changes
the term “comprehensive land use plan” to “airport land use compatibility plan.”
2002 Assembly Bill 2776 (Simitian) Chapter 496, Statutes of 2002—Requires information regarding
the location of a property within an airport influence area be disclosed as part of certain real
estate transactions effective January 1, 2004.
2002 Senate Bill 1468 (Knight) Chapter 971, Statutes of 2002—Changes ALUC preparation of airport
land use compatibility plans for military airports from optional to required. Requires that the
plans be consistent with the safety and noise standards in the Air Installation Compatible Use
Zone for that airport. Requires that the general plan and any specific plans be consistent with
these standards where there is military airport, but an airport land use commission does not
exist.
2003 Assembly Bill 332 (Mullin) Chapter 351, Statutes of 2003—Clarifies that school districts and
community college districts are subject to compatibility plans. Requires local public agencies to
notify ALUC and Division of Aeronautics at least 45 days prior to deciding to overrule the
ALUC.
Adds that prior to granting building construction permits, local agencies shall be guided by the
criteria established in the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook and any related federal aviation
regulations to the extent that the criteria has been incorporated into their airport land use
compatibility plan.
2004 Senate Bill 1223 (Committee on Transportation) Chapter 615, Statutes of 2004—Technical
revisions eliminating most remaining references to the term “comprehensive land use plan” and
replacing it with “airport land use compatibility plan.” Also replaces the terms “planning area”
and “study area” with “airport influence area.”
2005 Assembly Bill 1358 (Mullin) Chapter 29, Statutes of 2005—Requires a school district to notify
the Department of Transportation before leasing property for a new school site within two
miles of an airport. Also makes these provisions applicable to charter schools.
2007 Senate Bill 10 (Kehoe) Chapter 287, Statutes of 2007—The San Diego County Regional Airport
Authority Reform Act of 2007. Restructures the airport authority established in 2001 by AB 93
(Wayne), with a set of goals related to governance, accountability, planning and operations at
San Diego International Airport.
Page 324 of 550
APPENDIX A STATE LAWS RELATED TO AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING
A–42 Mendocino County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
2009 Assembly Bill 45 (Blakeslee) Chapter 404, Statutes of 2009—Requires small wind energy
systems installed near airports to comply with all applicable Federal Aviation Administration
requirements, including Subpart B of Part 77. These systems are not allowed to locate in vicinity
of an airport if they are prohibited by a comprehensive land use plan or any implementing
regulations adopted by an Airport Land Use Commission.
2010 Senate Bill 1333 (Yee) Chapter 329, Statutes of 2010—If a local government requires dedication
of an avigation easement to the owner or operator of the airport as a condition of approval of
a noise-sensitive project, the avigation easement must be granted prior to the issuance of the
building permit. Also requires that a termination clause be included in the avigation easement if
the project is not built or the permit has expired or been revoked.
2012 Assembly Bill 805 (Torres) Chapter 180, Statutes of 2012—Recodifies the Common Interest
Development Act which requires a recorded disclosure statement if a common interest
development is located within an airport influence area.
2012 Assembly Bill 1486 (Lara) Chapter 690, Statutes of 2012—Exempts from CEQA the design,
construction and maintenance of certain structures and equipment of the Los Angeles Regional
Interoperable Communications System (LA-RICS). However, any new antenna would be
required to comply with applicable state and federal height restrictions and any height limits
established by an applicable airport land use compatibility plan.
2013 Assembly Bill 1058 (Chàvez) Chapter 83, Statutes of 2013—Modifies the process by which
directors are appointed to the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority; the entity
responsible for preparing, adopting and amending airport land use compatibility plans for each
airport in San Diego County.
2013 Assembly Bill 758 (Block) Chapter 606, Statutes of 2013—Provides the City of Coronado with
540 days, instead of the standard 180 days, of any amendment to the airport land use
compatibility plan to amend its general plan and any applicable specific plan.
Page 325 of 550
A P P E N D I X B
Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 77
Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–1
Current as of June 2016
Subpart A
GENERAL
77.1 Purpose.
This part establishes:
(a) The requirements to provide notice to the FAA of certain proposed construction, or the alteration
of existing structures;
(b) The standards used to determine obstructions to air navigation, and navigational and
communication facilities;
(c) The process for aeronautical studies of obstructions to air navigation or navigational facilities to
determine the effect on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace, air navigation facilities or
equipment; and
(d) The process to petition the FAA for discretionary review of determinations, revisions, and
extensions of determinations.
77.3 Definitions.
For the purpose of this part:
“Non-precision instrument runway” means a runway having an existing instrument approach procedure
utilizing air navigation facilities with only horizontal guidance, or area type navigation equipment, for
which a straight-in non-precision instrument approach procedure has been approved, or planned, and
for which no precision approach facilities are planned, or indicated on an FAA planning document or
military service military airport planning document.
Planned or proposed airport is an airport that is the subject of at least one of the following documents
received by the FAA:
(1) Airport proposals submitted under 14 CFR Part 157.
(2) Airport Improvement Program requests for aid.
(3) Notices of existing airports where prior notice of the airport construction or alteration was not
provided as required by 14 CFR Part 157.
(4) Airport layout plans.
(5) DOD proposals for airports used only by the U.S. Armed Forces.
(6) DOD proposals on joint-use (civil-military) airports.
Page 326 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(7) Completed airport site selection feasibility study.
“Precision instrument runway” means a runway having an existing instrument approach procedure
utilizing an Instrument Landing System (ILS), or a Precision Approach Radar (PAR). It also means a
runway for which a precision approach system is planned and is so indicated by an FAA-approved airport
layout plan; a military service approved military airport layout plan; any other FAA planning document,
or military service military airport planning document.
“Public use airport” is an airport available for use by the general public without a requireme nt for prior
approval of the airport owner or operator.
“Seaplane base” is considered to be an airport only if its sea lanes are outlined by visual markers.
“Utility runway” means a runway that is constructed for and intended to be used by propeller driven
aircraft of 12,500 pounds maximum gross weight and less.
“Visual runway” means a runway intended solely for the operation of aircraft using visual approach
procedures, with no straight-in instrument approach procedure and no instrument designation indicated
on an FAA-approved airport layout plan, a military service approved military airport layout plan, or by
any planning document submitted to the FAA by competent authority.
Subpart B
NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
77.5 Applicability.
(a) If you propose any construction or alteration described in §77.9, you must provide adequate notice
to the FAA of that construction or alteration.
(b) If requested by the FAA, you must also file supplemental notice before the start date and upon
completion of certain construction or alterations that are described in §77.9.
(c) Notice received by the FAA under this subpart is used to:
(1) Evaluate the effect of the proposed construction or alteration on safety in air commerce and
the efficient use and preservation of the navigable airspace and of airport traffic capacity at
public use airports;
(2) Determine whether the effect of proposed construction or alteration is a hazard to air
navigation;
(3) Determine appropriate marking and lighting recommendations, using FAA Advisory Circular
70/7460–1, Obstruction Marking and Lighting;
(4) Determine other appropriate measures to be applied for continued safety of air navigation; and
(5) Notify the aviation community of the construction or alteration of objects that affect the
navigable airspace, including the revision of charts, when necessary.
Page 327 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–3
77.7 Form and time of notice.
(a) If you are required to file notice under §77.9, you must submit to the FAA a completed FAA Form
7460–1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration. FAA Form 7460 –1 is available at FAA
regional offices and on the Internet.
(b) You must submit this form at least 45 days before the start date of the proposed construction or
alteration or the date an application for a construction permit is filed, whichever is earliest.
(c) If you propose construction or alteration that is also subject to the licensing requirements of the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), you must submit notice to the FAA on or before the
date that the application is filed with the FCC.
(d) If you propose construction or alteration to an existing structure that exceeds 2,000 ft. in height
above ground level (AGL), the FAA presumes it to be a hazard to air navigation that results in an
inefficient use of airspace. You must include details explaining both why the proposal would not
constitute a hazard to air navigation and why it would not cause an inefficient use of airspace.
(e) The 45-day advance notice requirement is waived if immediate construction or alteration is required
because of an emergency involving essential public services, public health, or public safety. You may
provide notice to the FAA by any available, expeditious means. You must file a completed FAA
Form 7460–1 within 5 days of the initial notice to the FAA. Outside normal business hours, the
nearest flight service station will accept emergency notices.
77.9 Construction or alteration requiring notice.
If requested by the FAA, or if you propose any of the following types of construction or alteration, you
must file notice with the FAA of:
(a) Any construction or alteration that is more than 200 ft. AGL at its site.
(b) Any construction or alteration that exceeds an imaginary surface extending outward and upward at
any of the following slopes:
(1) 100 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 20,000 ft. from the nearest point of the nearest runway of
each airport described in paragraph (d) of this section with its longest runway more than 3,200
ft. in actual length, excluding heliports.
(2) 50 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 10,000 ft. from the nearest point of the nearest runway of
each airport described in paragraph (d) of this section with its longest runway no more than
3,200 ft. in actual length, excluding heliports.
(3) 25 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 5,000 ft. from the nearest point of the nearest landing and
takeoff area of each heliport described in paragraph (d) of this section.
(c) Any highway, railroad, or other traverse way for mobile objects, of a height which, if adjusted
upward 17 feet for an Interstate Highway that is part of the National System of Military and
Interstate Highways where overcrossings are designed for a minimum of 17 feet vertical distance,
15 feet for any other public roadway, 10 feet or the height of the highest mobile object that would
normally traverse the road, whichever is greater, for a private road, 23 feet for a railroad, and for a
waterway or any other traverse way not previously mentioned, an amount equal to the height of the
highest mobile object that would normally traverse it, would exceed a standard of paragraph (a) or
(b) of this section.
(d) Any construction or alteration on any of the following airports and heliports:
Page 328 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(1) A public use airport listed in the Airport/Facility Directory, Alaska Supplement, or Pacific
Chart Supplement of the U.S. Government Flight Information Publications;
(2) A military airport under construction, or an airport under construction that will be available
for public use;
(3) An airport operated by a Federal agency or the DOD.
(4) An airport or heliport with at least one FAA-approved instrument approach procedure.
(e) You do not need to file notice for construction or alteration of:
(1) Any object that will be shielded by existing structures of a permanent and substantial nature or
by natural terrain or topographic features of equal or greater height, and will be located in the
congested area of a city, town, or settlement where the shielded structure will not adversely
affect safety in air navigation;
(2) Any air navigation facility, airport visual approach or landing aid, aircraft arresting device, or
meteorological device meeting FAA-approved siting criteria or an appropriate military service
siting criteria on military airports, the location and height of which are fixed by its functional
purpose;
(3) Any construction or alteration for which notice is required by any other FAA regulation.
(4) Any antenna structure of 20 feet or less in height, except one that would increase the height of
another antenna structure.
77.11 Supplemental notice requirements.
(a) You must file supplemental notice with the FAA when:
(1) The construction or alteration is more than 200 feet in height AGL at its site; or
(2) Requested by the FAA.
(b) You must file supplemental notice on a prescribed FAA form to be received within the time limits
specified in the FAA determination. If no time limit has been specified, you must submit
supplemental notice of construction to the FAA within 5 days after the structure reaches its greatest
height.
(c) If you abandon a construction or alteration proposal that requires supplemental notice, you must
submit notice to the FAA within 5 days after the project is abandoned.
(d) If the construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed, you must submit notice to the FAA
within 5 days after the construction or alteration is dismantled or destroyed.
Page 329 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–5
Subpart C
STANDARDS FOR DETERMINING OBSTRUCTIONS TO
AIR NAVIGATION OR NAVIGATIONAL AIDS OR FACILITIES
77.13 Applicability.
This subpart describes the standards used for determining obstructions to air navigation, navigational
aids, or navigational facilities. These standards apply to the following:
(a) Any object of natural growth, terrain, or permanent or temporary construction or alteration,
including equipment or materials used and any permanent or temporary apparatus.
(b) The alteration of any permanent or temporary existing structure by a change in its height, including
appurtenances, or lateral dimensions, including equipment or material used therein.
77.15 Scope.
(a) This subpart describes standards used to determine obstructions to air navigation that may affect
the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace and the operation of planned or existing air navigation
and communication facilities. Such facilities include air navigation aids, communication equipment,
airports, Federal airways, instrument approach or departure procedures, and approved off-airway
routes.
(b) Objects that are considered obstructions under the standards described in this subpart are presumed
hazards to air navigation unless further aeronautical study concludes that the object is not a hazard.
Once further aeronautical study has been initiated, the FAA will use the standards in this subpart,
along with FAA policy and guidance material, to determine if the object is a hazard to air navigation.
(c) The FAA will apply these standards with reference to an e xisting airport facility, and airport
proposals received by the FAA, or the appropriate military service, before it issues a final
determination.
(d) For airports having defined runways with specially prepared hard surfaces, the primary surface for
each runway extends 200 feet beyond each end of the runway. For airports having defined strips or
pathways used regularly for aircraft takeoffs and landings, and designated runways, without specially
prepared hard surfaces, each end of the primary surface for each su ch runway shall coincide with
the corresponding end of the runway. At airports, excluding seaplane bases, having a defined landing
and takeoff area with no defined pathways for aircraft takeoffs and landings, a determination must
be made as to which portions of the landing and takeoff area are regularly used as landing and
takeoff pathways. Those determined pathways must be considered runways, and an appropriate
primary surface as defined in §77.19 will be considered as longitudinally centered on each such
runway. Each end of that primary surface must coincide with the corresponding end of that runway.
(e) The standards in this subpart apply to construction or alteration proposals on an airport (including
heliports and seaplane bases with marked lanes) if that a irport is one of the following before the
issuance of the final determination:
(1) Available for public use and is listed in the Airport/Facility Directory, Supplement Alaska, or
Supplement Pacific of the U.S. Government Flight Information Publications; or
Page 330 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(2) A planned or proposed airport or an airport under construction of which the FAA has received
actual notice, except DOD airports, where there is a clear indication the airport will be available
for public use; or,
(3) An airport operated by a Federal agency or the DOD; or,
(4) An airport that has at least one FAA-approved instrument approach.
77.17 Obstruction standards.
(a) An existing object, including a mobile object, is, and a future object would be an obstruction to air
navigation if it is of greater height than any of the following heights or surfaces:
(1) A height of 499 feet AGL at the site of the object.
(2) A height that is 200 feet AGL, or above the established airport elevation, whichever is higher,
within 3 nautical miles of the established reference point of an airport, excluding heliports, with
its longest runway more than 3,200 feet in actual length, and that height increases in the
proportion of 100 feet for each additional nautical mile from the airport up to a maximum of
499 feet.
(3) A height within a terminal obstacle clearance area, including an initial approach segment, a
departure area, and a circling approach area, which would result in the vertical distance between
any point on the object and an established minimum instrument flight altitude within that area
or segment to be less than the required obstacle clearance.
(4) A height within an en route obstacle clearance area, including turn and termination areas, of a
Federal Airway or approved off-airway route, that would increase the minimum obstacle
clearance altitude.
(5) The surface of a takeoff and landing area of an airport or any imaginary surface established
under §77.19, 77.21, or 77.23. However, no part of the takeoff or landing area itself will be
considered an obstruction.
(b) Except for traverse ways on or near an airport with an operative ground traffic control service
furnished by an airport traffic control tower or by the airport management and coordinated with the
air traffic control service, the standards of paragraph (a) of this section apply to traverse ways used
or to be used for the passage of mobile objects only after the heights of these traverse ways are
increased by:
(1) 17 feet for an Interstate Highway that is part of the National System of Military and Interstate
Highways where overcrossings are designed for a minimum of 17 feet vertical distance.
(2) 15 feet for any other public roadway.
(3) 10 feet or the height of the highest mobile object that would normally traverse the road,
whichever is greater, for a private road.
(4) 23 feet for a railroad.
(5) For a waterway or any other traverse way not previously mentioned, an amount equal to the
height of the highest mobile object that would normally traverse it.
Page 331 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–7
77.19 Civil airport imaginary surfaces.
The following civil airport imaginary surfaces are established with re lation to the airport and to each
runway. The size of each such imaginary surface is based on the category of each runway according to
the type of approach available or planned for that runway. The slope and dimensions of the approach
surface applied to each end of a runway are determined by the most precise approach procedure existing
or planned for that runway end.
(a) Horizontal surface. A horizontal plane 150 feet above the established airport elevation, the perimeter
of which is constructed by Swinging arcs of a specified radii from the center of each end of the
primary surface of each runway of each airport and connecting the adjacent arcs by lines tangent to
those arcs. The radius of each arc is:
(1) 5,000 feet for all runways designated as utility or visual;
(2) 10,000 feet for all other runways. The radius of the arc specified for each end of a runway will
have the same arithmetical value. That value will be the highest determined for either end of
the runway. When a 5,000-foot arc is encompassed by tangents connecting two adjacent
10,000-foot arcs, the 5,000-foot arc shall be disregarded on the construction of the perimeter
of the horizontal surface.
(b) Conical surface. A surface extending outward and upward from the periphery of the horizontal
surface at a slope of 20 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet.
(c) Primary surface. A surface longitudinally centered on a runway. When the runway has a specially
prepared hard surface, the primary surface extends 200 feet beyond each end of that runway; but
when the runway has no specially prepared hard surface, the primary surface ends at each end of
that runway. The elevation of any point on the primary surface is the same as the elevation of the
nearest point on the runway centerline. The width of the primary surface is:
(1) 250 feet for utility runways having only visual approaches.
(2) 500 feet for utility runways having non-precision instrument approaches.
(3) For other than utility runways, the width is:
(i) 500 feet for visual runways having only visual approaches.
(ii) 500 feet for non-precision instrument runways having visibility minimums greater than
three-fourths statute mile.
(iii) 1,000 feet for a non-precision instrument runway having a non-precision instrument
approach with visibility minimums as low as three-fourths of a statute mile, and for
precision instrument runways.
(iv) The width of the primary surface of a runway will be that width prescribed in this section
for the most precise approach existing or planned for either end of that runway.
(d) Approach surface. A surface longitudinally centered on the extended runway centerline and
extending outward and upward from each end of the primary surface. An approach surface is applied
to each end of each runway based upon the type of approach available or planned for that runway
end.
Page 332 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–8 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
(1) The inner edge of the approach surface is the same width as the primary surface and it expands
uniformly to a width of:
(i) 1,250 feet for that end of a utility runway with only visual approaches;
(ii) 1,500 feet for that end of a runway other than a utility runway with only visual approaches;
(iii) 2,000 feet for that end of a utility runway with a non-precision instrument approach;
(iv) 3,500 feet for that end of a non-precision instrument runway other than utility, having
visibility minimums greater that three-fourths of a statute mile;
(v) 4,000 feet for that end of a non-precision instrument runway, other than utility, having a
non-precision instrument approach with visibility minimums as low as three -fourths
statute mile; and
(vi) 16,000 feet for precision instrument runways.
(2) The approach surface extends for a horizontal distance of:
(i) 5,000 feet at a slope of 20 to 1 for all utility and visual runways;
(ii) 10,000 feet at a slope of 34 to 1 for all non-precision instrument runways other than utility;
and
(iii) 10,000 feet at a slope of 50 to 1 with an additional 40,000 feet at a slope of 40 to 1 for all
precision instrument runways.
(3) The outer width of an approach surface to an end of a runway will be that width prescribed in
this subsection for the most precise approach existing or planned for that runway end.
(e) Transitional surface. These surfaces extend outward and upward at right angles to the runway
centerline and the runway centerline extended at a slope of 7 to 1 from the sides of the primary
surface and from the sides of the approach surfaces. Transitional surfaces for those portions of the
precision approach surface which project through and beyond the limits of the conical surface,
extend a distance of 5,000 feet measured horizontally from the edge of the approach surface and at
right angles to the runway centerline.
77.21 Department of Defense (DOD) airport imaginary surfaces.
(a) Related to airport reference points. These surfaces apply to all military airports. For the purposes of
this section, a military airport is any airport operated by the DOD.
(1) Inner horizontal surface. A plane that is oval in shape at a height of 150 feet above the
established airfield elevation. The plane is constructed by scribing an arc with a radius of 7,500
feet about the centerline at the end of each runway and interconnecting these arcs with
tangents.
(2) Conical surface. A surface extending from the periphery of the inner horizontal surface
outward and upward at a slope of 20 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 7,000 feet to a height of
500 feet above the established airfield elevation.
Page 333 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–9
(3) Outer horizontal surface. A plane, located 500 feet above the established airfield elevation,
extending outward from the outer periphery of the conical surface for a horizontal distance of
30,000 feet.
(b) Related to runways. These surfaces apply to all military airports.
(1) Primary surface. A surface located on the ground or water longitudinally centered on each
runway with the same length as the runway. The width of the primary surface for runways is
2,000 feet. However, at established bases where substantial construction has taken place in
accordance with a previous lateral clearance criteria, the 2,000-foot width may be reduced to
the former criteria.
(2) Clear zone surface. A surface located on the ground or water at each end of the primary surface,
with a length of 1,000 feet and the same width as the primary surface.
(3) Approach clearance surface. An inclined plane, symmetrical about the runway centerline
extended, beginning 200 feet beyond each end of the primary surface at the centerline elevation
of the runway end and extending for 50,000 feet. The slope of the approach clearance surface
is 50 to 1 along the runway centerline extended until it reaches an elevation of 500 feet above
the established airport elevation. It then continues horizontally at this elevation to a point
50,000 feet from the point of beginning. The width of this surface at the runway end is the
same as the primary surface, it flares uniformly, and the width at 50,000 is 16,000 feet.
(4) Transitional surfaces. These surfaces connect the primary surfaces, the first 200 feet of the
clear zone surfaces, and the approach clearance surfaces to the inner horizontal surface, conical
surface, outer horizontal surface or other transitional surfaces. The slope of the transi tional
surface is 7 to 1 outward and upward at right angles to the runway centerline.
77.23 Heliport imaginary surfaces.
(a) Primary surface. The area of the primary surface coincides in size and shape with the designated
take-off and landing area. This surface is a horizontal plane at the elevation of the established
heliport elevation.
(b) Approach surface. The approach surface begins at each end of the heliport primary surface with the
same width as the primary surface, and extends outward and upward for a horiz ontal distance of
4,000 feet where its width is 500 feet. The slope of the approach surface is 8 to 1 for civil heliports
and 10 to 1 for military heliports.
(c) Transitional surfaces. These surfaces extend outward and upward from the lateral boundaries of the
primary surface and from the approach surfaces at a slope of 2 to 1 for a distance of 250 feet
measured horizontally from the centerline of the primary and approach surfaces.
Subpart D
AERONAUTICAL STUDIES AND DETERMINATIONS
Page 334 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–10 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
77.25 Applicability.
(a) This subpart applies to any aeronautical study of a proposed construction or alteration for which
notice to the FAA is required under §77.9.
(b) The purpose of an aeronautical study is to determine whether the aeronautical effects of the specific
proposal and, where appropriate, the cumulative impact resulting from the proposed construction
or alteration when combined with the effects of other existing or proposed structures, would
constitute a hazard to air navigation.
(c) The obstruction standards in subpart C of this part are supplemented by other manuals and
directives used in determining the effect on the navigable airspace of a proposed construction or
alteration. When the FAA needs additional information, it may circulate a study to interested parties
for comment.
77.27 Initiation of studies.
The FAA will conduct an aeronautical study when:
(a) Requested by the sponsor of any proposed construction or alteration for which a notice is submitted;
or
(b) The FAA determines a study is necessary.
77.29 Evaluating aeronautical effect.
(a) The FAA conducts an aeronautical study to determine the impact of a proposed structure, an
existing structure that has not yet been studied by the FAA, or an alteration of an existing structure
on aeronautical operations, procedures, and the safety of flight. These studies include evaluating:
(1) The impact on arrival, departure, and en route procedures for aircraft operating under visual
flight rules;
(2) The impact on arrival, departure, and en route procedures for aircraft opera ting under
instrument flight rules;
(3) The impact on existing and planned public use airports;
(4) Airport traffic capacity of existing public use airports and public use airport development plans
received before the issuance of the final determination;
(5) Minimum obstacle clearance altitudes, minimum instrument flight rules altitudes, approved or
planned instrument approach procedures, and departure procedures;
(6) The potential effect on ATC radar, direction finders, ATC tower line -of-sight visibility, and
physical or electromagnetic effects on air navigation, communication facilities, and other
surveillance systems;
(7) The aeronautical effects resulting from the cumulative impact of a proposed construction or
alteration of a structure when combined with the effects of other existing or proposed
structures.
(b) If you withdraw the proposed construction or alteration or revise it so that it is no longer identified
as an obstruction, or if no further aeronautical study is necessary, the FAA may terminate the study.
Page 335 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–11
77.31 Determinations.
(a) The FAA will issue a determination stating whether the proposed construction or alteration would
be a hazard to air navigation, and will advise all known interested persons.
(b) The FAA will make determinations based on the aeronautical study findings and will identify the
following:
(1) The effects on VFR/IFR aeronautical departure/arrival operations, air traffic procedures,
minimum flight altitudes, and existing, planned, or proposed airports listed in §77.15(e) of
which the FAA has received actual notice prior to issuance of a final determination.
(2) The extent of the physical and/or electromagnetic effect on the operation of existing or
proposed air navigation facilities, communication aids, or surveillance systems.
(c) The FAA will issue a Determination of Hazard to Air Navigation when the aeronautical study
concludes that the proposed construction or alteration will exceed an obstruction standard and
would have a substantial aeronautical impact.
(d) A Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation will be issued when the aeronautical study
concludes that the proposed construction or alteration will exceed an obstruction standard but
would not have a substantial aeronautical impact to air navigation. A Determination of No Hazard
to Air Navigation may include the following:
(1) Conditional provisions of a determination.
(2) Limitations necessary to minimize potential problems, such as the use of temporary
construction equipment.
(3) Supplemental notice requirements, when required.
(4) Marking and lighting recommendations, as appropriate.
(e) The FAA will issue a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation when a proposed structure
does not exceed any of the obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation.
77.33 Effective period of determinations.
(a) The effective date of a determination not subject to discretionary review under §77.37(b) is the date
of issuance. The effective date of all other determinations for a proposed or existing structure is 40
days from the date of issuance, provided a valid petition for review has not been received by the FAA.
If a valid petition for review is filed, the determination will not become final, pending disposition of
the petition.
(b) Unless extended, revised, or terminated, each Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued
under this subpart expires 18 months after the effective date of the determination, or on the date
the proposed construction or alteration is abandoned, whichever is earlier.
(c) A Determination of Hazard to Air Navigation has no expiration date.
Page 336 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–12 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
77.35 Extensions, terminations, revisions and corrections.
(a) You may petition the FAA official that issued the Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation
to revise or reconsider the determination based on new facts or to extend the effective period of the
determination, provided that:
(1) Actual structural work of the proposed construction or alteration, such as the laying of a
foundation, but not including excavation, has not been started; and
(2) The petition is submitted at least 15 days before the expiration date of the Determination of
No Hazard to Air Navigation.
(b) A Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued for those construction or alteration
proposals not requiring an FCC construction permit may be extended by the FAA one time for a
period not to exceed 18 months.
(c) A Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation issued for a proposal requiring an FCC
construction permit may be granted extensions for up to 18 months, provided that:
(1) You submit evidence that an application for a construction permit/license was filed with the
FCC for the associated site within 6 months of issuance of the determination; and
(2) You submit evidence that additional time is warranted because of FCC requirements; and
(3) Where the FCC issues a construction permit, a final Determination of No Hazard to Air
Navigation is effective until the date prescribed by the FCC for completion of the construction.
If an extension of the original FCC completion date is needed, an extension of the FAA
determination must be requested from the Obstruction Evaluation Service (OES).
(4) If the Commission refuses to issue a construction permit, the final determination expires on
the date of its refusal.
Subpart E
PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
77.37 General.
(a) If you are the sponsor, provided a substantive aeronautical comment on a proposal in an
aeronautical study, or have a substantive aeronautical comment on the proposal but were not given
an opportunity to state it, you may petition the FAA for a discretionary review of a determination,
revision, or extension of a determination issued by the FAA.
(b) You may not file a petition for discretionary review for a Determination of No Hazard that is issued
for a temporary structure, marking and lighting recommendation, or when a proposed structure or
alteration does not exceed obstruction standards contained in subpart C of this part.
Page 337 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–13
77.39 Contents of a petition.
(a) You must file a petition for discretionary review in writing and it must be received by the FAA
within 30 days after the issuance of a determination under §77.31, or a revision or extension of the
determination under §77.35.
(b) The petition must contain a full statement of the aeronautical basis on which the petition is made,
and must include new information or facts not previously considered or presented during the
aeronautical study, including valid aeronautical reasons why the determination, revisions, or
extension made by the FAA should be reviewed.
(c) In the event that the last day of the 30-day filing period falls on a weekend or a day the Federal
government is closed, the last day of the filing period is the next day that the government is open.
(d) The FAA will inform the petitioner or sponsor (if other than the petitioner) and the FCC (whenever
an FCC-related proposal is involved) of the filing of the petition and that the determination is not
final pending disposition of the petition.
77.41 Discretionary review results.
(a) If discretionary review is granted, the FAA will inform the petitioner and the sponsor (if other than
the petitioner) of the issues to be studied and reviewed. The review may include a request for
comments and a review of all records from the initial aeronautical study.
(b) If discretionary review is denied, the FAA will notify the petitioner and the sponsor (if other than
the petitioner), and the FCC, whenever a FCC-related proposal is involved, of the basis for the
denial along with a statement that the determination is final.
(c) After concluding the discretionary review process, the FAA will revise, affirm, or reverse the
determination.
Page 338 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–14 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Figure B1
CFR Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces
Page 339 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–15
Figure B2
CFR Part 77 Notification
FAA Form 7460-1
Page 340 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–16 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Figure B3
Online Submittal of Form 7460-1:
Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration
Historically a paper form called a “7460-1” was required to be submitted to the FAA for any project
proposed on airport property and certain projects near airports. Recently, the FAA has moved from
paper forms to an on-line system of evaluating the effects of a proposed project on the national airspace
system.
▪ The on-line system can be accessed at https://oeaaa.faa.gov.
This new system allows project proponents to submit and track their proposal as it progresses through
the FAA evaluation process.
The purpose of this guidance is to supplement and clarify the FAA user guide for the 7460 website.
▪ available at: https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/content/OEexternal_Guide_v3.1.pdf
We recommend that the user first read the entire guide provided by the FAA, and then use this document
to clarify some of the more complicated aspects of the online 7460 system.
When a project must be submitted to the FAA
CFR Title 14 Part 77.13 states that any person/organization who intends to sponsor any of the following
construction or alterations must notify the Administrator of the FAA:
▪ Any construction or alteration exceeding 200 ft. above ground level
▪ Any construction or alteration:
within 20,000 ft. of a public use or military airport which exceeds a
100:1 surface from any point on the runway of each airport with at
least one runway more than 3,200 ft.
within 10,000 ft. of a public use or military airport which exceeds a 50:1
surface from any point on the runway of each airport with its longest
runway no more than 3,200 ft.
within 5,000 ft. of a public use heliport which exceeds a 25:1 surface
▪ Any highway, railroad or other traverse way whose prescribed adjusted height would exceed the
above noted standards
▪ When requested by the FAA
▪ Any construction or alteration located on a public use airport or heliport regardless of height or
location.
Create an account
Before accessing the features of the website, the user will be required to create a username and password
to access the website.
The FAA has been
continuously improving the
oe/aaa website to be more
user friendly and increase the
on-line functionality. The look
and feel of the website may
change in the future, but the
majority of the content should
remain as is.
Page 341 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–17
Once a user has created an account, they will be able to log in and will be directed to the OE/AAA Portal
Page. This page displays a summary of any projects which have been entered into the website, categorized
by off-airport and on-airport projects.
Adding a Sponsor
Before a user can enter project specific information, a project sponsor must be created. A sponsor is the
person who is ultimately responsible for the construction or alteration. All FAA correspondence will be
addressed to the sponsor. The sponsor could be the airport manager for projects proposed by the airport,
or the developer proposing off airport construction. To create a sponsor contact, click “Add New
Sponsor” on the “portal” page. From there the user can add sponsors for various projects.
Page 342 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–18 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
When the user selects “Add New Sponsor”, they will be presented with the following screen:
NOTE: The party submitting
information through the FAA
website DOES NOT have to
be the same as the sponsor.
Often, a consultant or other
party under direction from the
sponsor makes the submittal
through the website
Page 343 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–19
Creating a New Submittal
There are two options for creating a new 7460 submittal. Again on the left side, either click “Add New
Case (off airport)” or “Add New Case (on airport)”
There are some differences in the required fields for “on airport” vs. “off airport” but the differences are
minor and self-explanatory. One tip: for off airport submittals there is a field for “requested
marking/lighting”. If the user does not have a preference, select other from the pull down menu and in
the “other field” state “no preference”.
Page 344 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–20 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Accurate lat/long and site
elevation is critical for an
accurate airspace
determination.
It is recommended that
survey quality data be
obtained from a recent
survey, a GPS unit, or
worst case, scaled from a
topo quad.
Page 345 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–21
▪ The most common “notice of” is construction. Select from pull down menu.
▪ Latitude and longitude must be entered for the structure/construction activity.
▪ Most 7460 submittals will require multiple points with lat/long unless the 7460 is for a pole/tower/
or other single point object. Buildings and construction areas all require points indicating the extents
of the building or area. More information is provided below on how to add additional points to a
submittal.
▪ There is a field to describe the activity taking place. In some complex acti vities the field does not
provide enough room for the required text. An additional explanatory letter can be attached.
Additional information is provided in this section on how to add a letter or document to the
submittal.
▪ Red asterisks indicate the required fields.
▪ Unless there has been a previous aeronautical study for this submittal leave the “prior study” fields
blank.
▪ Only select “common frequency bands” if the proposed structure will transmit a signal.
If the submittal is a building or construction area that is more than a single lat/long point the user must
save the data first. Click save at the bottom of the page. This will bring up a summary screen of the
case. To add more points click “clone” under the heading “actions”.
The clone tool copies all the relevant information to a new page where an additional lat/long and
elevation can be entered. However, the clone process does not number the various points of a proposed
project. When entering the details for a point (see Image 5) it is helpful if the user assigns a number to
the point and references the total number of points for the project (e.g. point 2 of 20). The numbering
can be included in the project “description/remarks” field for each point.
It should be noted that each individual point associated with a project (e.g. each corner of a building) is
evaluated individually, thus the importance of including a numbering system (2 of 20) in the
text/description box.
Page 346 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–22 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Once done, click “save” again. Now the user will see two records under the “project summary” heading.
Continue this process of cloning for all the remaining points.
Once all the points have been entered, each point must be verified. There is a red X with the words
“verify map” indicating the user has not verified the location. Click Verify Map, a popup will display the
lat/long point on a topo map and the user must verify that it is in the correct location. After clicking
“verify map” on the popup, the red X will become a blue checkmark. It seems to be more efficient to
enter all of the points associated with a project and then return to verify each point on the map at one
time.
All on-airport project submittals must have a “project sketch” included. Under the “actions” column
select “upload a PDF”. Once you have uploaded a sketch for all the points associated with the project
the red X under “sketch” will turn to a green check mark. Off-airport projects do not require a “project
sketch”, but the user can still upload one for informational purposes.
If the user needs to add any other information such as an explanatory letter, clicking on “upload a PDF”
will allow the user to upload more documents, although only one at a time. Keep in mind that if additional
Page 347 of 550
TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77 APPENDIX B
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) B–23
PDFs or information are being provided, like the project sketch it must be uploaded to every point
associated with the project.
Once the maps have been verified and sketches uploaded for all points associated with the case, the user
will be able to submit the 7460 to the FAA for review.
Status of Submitted Projects
To check the status of a submittal, click on either “my cases (off airport)” or “my cases (on airport)” to
see a list of what has been submitted. Each of the multiple points associated with one project will be
listed as if they are separate, although still associated. The points will have a status:
Project Status Definitions:
Draft: Cases that have been saved by the user but have not been submitted to the FAA.
Waiting: Cases that have not been submitted to the FAA and are waiting for an action from the user,
either to verify the map or attach a sketch.
Accepted: Cases that have been submitted to the FAA.
Add Letter: Cases that have been reviewed by the FAA and require additional information from the
user.
Work in Progress: Cases that are being evaluated by the FAA.
Determined: Cases that have a completed aeronautical study and an FAA determination.
Terminated: Cases that are no longer valid.
These definitions are also shown at the bottom of the summary screen.
Page 348 of 550
APPENDIX B TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 77
B–24 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This page left intentionally blank
Page 349 of 550
A P P E N D I X C
Airport Land Use Compatibility Concepts
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) C–1
O VERVIEW
The land use compatibility concerns addressed by ALUCs can generally be grouped under four headings:
noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight. Table C1 briefly describes the nature of each of these
compatibility concerns. The types of land use measures available to ALUCs for addressing these concerns
are identified as well. The discussion that follows highlights some additional factors to be recognized
when airport land use compatibility issues are examined.
N OISE
Measuring Noise Impacts
The principal tool by which airports and surrounding communities can assess airport noise impacts is
through calculation of Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contours. In making such assess-
ments, however, the limitations of CNEL contours are essential to recognize.
▪ Averaging. CNEL contours represent a single day’s average of all of the aircraft noise events which
take place at an airport over a year’s time. The contours are a composite of individual noise events
and thus do not directly measure these events. However, because noise is measured on a logarithmic
scale, the contours can be significantly affected by a few particularly loud events or aircraft types.
Also, particularly annoying noise (such as high-pitch sounds or ones which create vibrations) are not
explicitly taken into account. Consequently, other noise factors often must be considered in land use
compatibility planning evaluations.
▪ Accuracy. Many assumptions go into the calculation of noise contours. This is particularly the case
at general aviation airports. A 2-3 dB accuracy with regard to calculation of existing contours is
considered good. For future contours, the added uncertainty of forecasting both activity levels and
aircraft technology means that an accuracy of ±5 dB is as much as can realistically be expec ted.
▪ Scope. As normally depicted, cumulative noise level contours do not encompass the total area
affected by aircraft noise around an airport. Use of noise contours to show marginally affected areas
is, at best, imprecise because of the varied distribution of flight tracks and altitudes which occurs with
increased distance from the runway ends.
▪ Relationship to Land Uses. Noise contours by themselves indicate nothing as to whether a given
type of land use is compatible at a particular noise exposure. Basic compatibility guidelines have been
established by both the federal and state governments, but adjustment of these criteria to reflect local
community and airport conditions is still essential. This adjustment process is often referred to as
normalization. Even after normalization has been applied, however, the comparative noise sensitivity
of one person versus another still remains as a variable.
Page 350 of 550
APPENDIX C AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS
C–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Noise Footprints of Individual Aircraft
A different perspective on airport noise impacts can be obtained by examining sound level data for
individual aircraft operations as opposed to the composite contours described above. Figure C2 shows
a series of what are usually referred to as single -event levels or aircraft noise footprints. For each of the
aircraft listed, these contours indicate the momentary, maximum sound levels experienced on the ground
as the aircraft flies over while approaching and departing a runway. The 65 dBA sound level (the
outermost contour) is significant in that this is the level at which interference with speech begins to be
significant.
Formatted in this way, the noise levels of various types of aircraft can readily be compared. The footprints
dramatically illustrate, for example, why early business jets and other noisy aircraft (including fire attack
aircraft) can have a major effect on the size of cumulative noise contours despite their relatively small
number of annual operations. The footprints also show the relatively small noise impact of contemporary
regional airline jets—about the same as an average, twin piston-engine airplane.
S AFETY
Assessing Aircraft Accident Risks
Accident risks can generally be assessed in terms of two components: the frequency with which the
accidents can be predicted to occur; and the potential severity of an accident when one occurs. Aircraft
accidents near airports are events which happen infrequently, but, when they do, the consequences can
be severe. To better appreciate the relationship between risks and safety compatibility planning for airport
environs, further examination of these two components is useful.
The frequency component of risk is itself comprised of two elements. One is the relative frequency with
which accidents occur in any given location as compared to other locations. The second is the absolute
frequency with which accidents take place in a given proximity to an airport runwa y over a specified
period of time. Until recently, good data on the spatial or geographic distribution of near-airport, general
aviation aircraft accidents was lacking. As discussed below, valuable information on this topic is now
available.
The temporal, or time, element of aircraft accident frequency remains a controversial subject. Accident
probabilities as a function of time can be calculated using nationwide ratios of accidents to aircraft
operations and then multiplying by the number of aircraft operations expected to take place at an
individual airport over a specified period of time. For any particular parcel or small area, however, the
resulting probability numbers are so low as to seem insignificant. The problem is that the numbers by
themselves lack context. Sometimes, attempts are made to give them a sense of scale by making
comparisons with the probability of an individual being struck by lightning or experiencing some other
calamity. Even then, though, it is difficult to base land use policies on risk data comparing widely different
types of events.
A further aspect of the problem, especially with regard to aircraft accident risks, is that public perception is
perhaps more important than statistics. While the reality is that accidents involving light, general aviation
aircraft seldom cause major damage or deaths on the ground, public perception usually is that only “luck”
prevented any particular event from being a major catastrophe. Accidents involving larger aircraft—
Page 351 of 550
AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS APPENDIX C
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) C–3
business jets and airline aircraft—are more likely to have significant consequences to land uses, but there
are fewer such aircraft flying at most airports and, on a national basis, the accident frequency is lower
than for small planes. Also important—especially when considering the fundamental role of ALUCs to
protect airports—is that, when an aircraft accident happens near an airport, public response is usually in
favor of restricting the airport usage, not the surrounding land uses.
Ultimately, this issue boils down to the question of: what is acceptable risk? The answer to this question
is something which individual communities must each decide. In urban locations, people generally accept
a somewhat higher level of risk than they might in rural areas, just as they accept a higher level of ambient
noise. It is simply one of the disadvantages of urban living which go hand in hand with the advantages.
Safety is relative, not absolute.
Aircraft Accident Locations
The number of off-airport aircraft accidents at any particular airport is too small to provide a meaningful
indication of where accidents may occur near that airport in the future. To better assess the geographic
distribution of aircraft accident risks near an airport, a larger database is necessary. A database of this type
was initially developed for the 1993 Airport Land Use Planning Handbook published by the California
Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program. The database was expanded in 1999, re-verified in
2011, and now contains information on some 873 general aviation aircraft accidents (445 arrival accidents
and 428 departure accidents) which occurred within 5 miles of an airport, but not on the runway. (This
data includes accidents at airports nationwide over roughly a 10-year period. However, because precise
location data is not available for most accidents, the database represents only a fraction of the total
number of off-airport accidents that took place during this time span.)
The charts in Figures C2 and C3 depict the relative geographic intensity of general aviation aircraft
accident risks for arrival and departure accidents, respectively. Each dot represents the location of an
aircraft accident site mapped with respect to the approach or departure runway which the ai rcraft was
intending to use for landing or had used on takeoff. The 20% contour represents the highest or most
concentrated risk intensity, the 40% contour represents the next highest risk intensity, etc. Each contour
interval is drawn so as to encompass 20% of the dots within the most compact area.
The charts reveal several facts:
▪ About half of arrival accidents and a third of departure accidents take place within the FAA -defined
runway protection zone for a runway with a low-visibility instrument approach procedure (a 2,500-
foot long trapezoid, varying from 1,000 feet to 1,750 feet in total width). This fact lends validity to
the importance of the runway protection zones as an area within which land use activities should be
minimal.
▪ Although the runway protection zones represent the locations within which risk levels are highest, a
significant degree of risk exists well beyond the runway protection zone boundaries. Among all near-
airport (within 5 miles) accidents, over 80% are concentrated within 1.5 to 2 miles of a runway end.
▪ Arrival accidents tend to be concentrated relatively close to the extended runway centerline. Some
80% occur within a strip extending 10,000 feet from the runway landing threshold and 2,000 feet to
each side of the runway centerline.
▪ Departure accidents are comparatively more dispersed laterally from the runway centerline, but are
concentrated closer to the runway end. Many departure accidents also occur lateral to the runway
Page 352 of 550
APPENDIX C AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS
C–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
itself, particularly when the runway is long. Approximately 80% of the departure accident sites lie
within an area 2,500 from the runway centerline and 6,000 feet beyond the runway end or adjacent
to the runway.
This data does not address the other major components of aircraft accident risk: the potential conse-
quences of accidents when they occur and the frequency with which they occur. The intent is merely to
illustrate the relative intensity of the risks on a geographic scale.
Furthermore, as with noise contours, risk data by itself does not answer the question of what degree of
land use restrictions should be established in response to the risks. Although most ALUCs have policies
which restrict certain land use activities in locations beyond the runway protection zones, the size of the
area in which restrictions are established and the specific restrictions applied vary from one county to
another.
A IRSPACE Protection
The Federal Aviation Administration establishes the criteria which determines the airspace essential to
the safe flight of aircraft to, from, and around airports. There are two separate sets of criteria, each with
a different purpose.
Criteria used to protect the airspace around airports from tall structures which could pose hazards to
flight are established in Title 14 Part 77 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14CFR77). The regulations,
though, do not give the FAA direct authority to limit the height of structures. This authority rests with
state and local governments. Rather, Part 77 serves primarily as a notification device. Before a structure
which would exceed the Part 77 surfaces is built, notification must be submitted to the FAA. The FAA
then conducts an aeronautical study to determine whether the object would or would not be a hazard to
air navigation. The FAA also may indicate that an obstruction should be marked and/or lighted.
The FAA’s direct authority with regard to airport airspace is to define instrument approach proce dures.
The criteria used for this purpose are outlined in the United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures
(TERPS). Unlike 14CFR77 which sets desirable limits on the height of structures, TERPS takes these
objects as a given and then uses that information in the procedure design. If a new structure is built which
penetrates one of the TERPS surfaces for an existing procedure, the procedure must be redesigned with
higher approach minimums or perhaps eliminated altogether.
In general, 14CFR77 surfaces for a particular airport are lower than those defined by TERPS. 14CFR77,
however, does not specifically take into account turns in approaches or, more significantly, in missed
approaches. Thus, it is possible for a structure to be built to a height which does not exceed the 14CFR77
limits, but still adversely affects an existing instrument approach procedure. Also to be considered is that
a structure which does not adversely affect an existing procedure could be the critical obstacle for a future,
not yet designed, procedure. For airports that have existing or planned instrument approach procedures,
a review of TERPS surfaces can be an important land use compatibility component.
Page 353 of 550
AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS APPENDIX C
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) C–5
O VERFLIGHT
Assessing Overflight Annoyance
A general definition of overflight impacts is that they are noise-related impacts affecting locations outside
the typical contours described by cumulative noise level metrics. Compared to the measured noise
impacts, overflight impacts are more subtle and subjective. Also, they seem to include elements of both
noise and safety concerns. Often the impacts are revealed in the form of annoyance expressed by some
people living near an airport.
Although overflight noise is detectible and therefore measurable, the highly subjective individual
reactions to overflights makes the value of measurement on a decibel scale questionable. A more
representative measure of overflight impacts is the absolute number of intrusive events which occur, but
there is no agreed-upon, scientific standard for what an acceptable number might be.
For the purposes of airport land use compatibility planning, a simpler form of assessment may be more
practical. This approach presumes that aircraft overflight impacts are potentially a concern anywhere
along the standard aircraft traffic pattern flight tracks for an airport. Annoyance concerns can also be
expected, but to lesser degrees, elsewhere in the airport vicinity where aircraft fly at or below traffic
pattern altitude while approaching or departing the runway.
Whether a significant degree of overflight annoyance will actually occur in the vicinity of an airport is
influenced by a variety of factors, both environmental and human. Building type and design, ambient
noise levels, the characteristics and predictability of the noise itself, and (as noted above) the frequency
of occurrence are among the environmental factors involved. An individual’s sense of annoyance at
overflights depends upon such factors as characteristics of the land use activity being disrupted, personal
sensitivity to noise, attitudes toward aviation, and experience and expectations regarding noise levels in
the community.
Buyer Awareness Measures
As indicated in Table C1, the basic means available to ALUCs for addressing overflight issues is through
buyer awareness measures. Buyer awareness programs recognize the subjective nature of annoyance. The
concept is that the likelihood of people being annoyed by airport activity can be reduced if they are made
aware of the airport’s proximity and the nature and location of aircraft overflights before moving into
the airport area.
Buyer awareness is really an umbrella term for three separate types of measures all having the objective
of ensuring that prospective buyers of property in the vicinity of an airport are informed about the
airport’s impacts on the property. Although variations are sometimes created, the three basic types of
buyer awareness measures are:
▪ Avigation Easement Dedication. A requirement for avigation easement dedication is usually
applied only to new development. It is the most comprehensive and stringent form of buyer
awareness measures. Although the rights associated with most avigation easements are established in
other forms (e.g., local, airport-vicinity, height-limit zoning ordinances, and Federal Aviation
Regulations), an avigation easement clearly conveys these rights to the airport owner.
Page 354 of 550
APPENDIX C AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS
C–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
▪ Recorded Overflight Notification. Recorded overflight notification is a type of deed notice. It is
similar to an avigation easement in that it is recorded with the deed to a property and is usually
implemented only in conjunction with some form of development approval process. Unlike an
easement, though, it does not convey any property rights. Deed notices serve only to formalize the
fact that a property is subject to aircraft overflights and noise.
▪ Real Estate Disclosure. Real estate disclosure is the least formal method of implementing a buyer
awareness program. It relies upon standard real estate disclosure laws and practices to ensure that
prospective buyers of property in the airport vicinity are informed about the proximity of a nearby
airport and the impacts it creates. The likelihood of this information being disclosed can be increased
if the airport or the local land use jurisdiction provide official notification to local real estate brokers
and title companies.
Page 355 of 550
A IRPORT L AND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS APPENDIX C
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) C–7
Table C1
Airport Land Use Compatibility Concepts
NOISE
Nature of Compatibility Concerns
▪ Disruption of human activities (such as conversation,
television watching, and sleep) by loud aircraft noise.
Land Use Measures Available for
Addressing the Concerns
▪ Avoid land uses involving activities, particularly outdoor
activities, which are sensitive to disruption by noise (and
encourage uses which are themselves inherently noisy).
▪ Design buildings so as to reduce the intrusion of noise
from outside (by, for example, minimizing the number of
exterior windows or installing sound insulation).
▪ Construct sound barriers to reduce impact of engine run-
ups and other ground-based aircraft noise.
SAFETY
Nature of Compatibility Concerns
▪ Risks to people and property on the ground in the event
of an aircraft accident.
▪ Land use characteristics which may affect the survivabil-
ity of an accident for occupants of an aircraft.
Land Use Measures Available for
Addressing the Concerns
▪ Minimize the number of people occupying areas where
accidents are most likely to occur.
▪ Avoid structures for which evacuation is difficult (multi -
story buildings in particular).
▪ Avoid uses for which evacuation of occupants is difficult
(for example, hospitals and children s schools).
▪ Design structures to reduce potential for small aircraft to
penetrate the building in the event of a crash.
▪ Provide open areas in the airport vicinity where small
aircraft can make a survivable emergency landing if
necessary.
AIRSPACE PROTECTION
Nature of Compatibility Concerns
▪ Tall structures creating hazards to navigable airspace
around airports.
▪ Visual hazards to flight (sources of smoke, glare, or lights
which can be confused with airport lights).
▪ Electronic hazards to flight (interference with radio
communication or navigation signals).
▪ Uses which can attract birds which aircraft might strike
while in flight.
Land Use Measures Available for
Addressing the Concerns
▪ Limit the heights of buildings, antennas, trees and other
tall objects in critical areas near airports.
▪ Avoid uses and facility designs which can create visual or
electronic hazards to flight.
▪ Avoid uses (such as landfills) which attract birds close to
airports.
OVERFLIGHT
Nature of Compatibility Concerns
▪ Human annoyance with frequent overflight of aircraft.
Land Use Measures Available for
Addressing the Concerns
▪ Establish policies intended to inform prospective buyers
of homes and other property in the airport vicinity that the
neighborhood is subject to aircraft overflights and noise.
Types of buyer awareness measures include:
▫ Avigation easement dedication (as a condition for
approval of a proposed new development).
▫ Recorded overflight notification (recorded as part of
the approval of a proposed new development).
▫ Real estate disclosure (a recommendation to be im-
plemented by real estate agents and sellers of prop -
erty located within the airport influence area).
Page 356 of 550
APPENDIX C AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS
C–8 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Figure C1
Noise Footprints of Selected Aircraft
Page 357 of 550
AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS APPENDIX C
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) C–9
Figure C2
General Aviation Accident Distribution Contours
All Arrivals
Page 358 of 550
APPENDIX C AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONCEPTS
C–10 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Figure C3
General Aviation Accident Distribution Contours
All Departures
Page 359 of 550
A P P E N D I X D
Methods for Determining Concentrations of People
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) D–1
I NTRODUCTION
The underlying safety compatibility criterion employed in this UKIALUCP is “usage intensity”—the
maximum number of people per acre that can be present in a given area at any one time. If a proposed
use exceeds the maximum intensity, it is considered incompatible and thus inconsistent with compatibility
planning policies. The usage intensity concept is identified in the California Airport Land Use Planning Hand-
book as the measure best suited for assessment of land use safety compatibility with airports. The Hand-
book is published by the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics is required
under state law to be used as a guide in preparation of airport land use compatibility plans.
C OUNTING P EOPLE
The most difficult part about calculating a use’s intensity is estimating the number of people expected to
use a particular facility under normal circumstances. All people—not just employees, but also customers
and visitors—who may be on the property at a single point in time, whether indoors or outside, must be
counted. The only exceptions are for rare special events, such as an air show at an airport or golf tourna-
ment, for which a facility is not designed and normally not used and for which extra safety precautions
can be taken as appropriate.
Ideally, the actual number of people for which the facility is designed would be known. For example, the
number of seats in a proposed movie theater can be determined with high accuracy once the theater size
is decided. Other buildings, though, may be built as a shell and the eventual number of occupants not
known until a specific tenant is found. Furthermore, even then, the number of occupants can change in
the future as tenants change. Even greater uncertainty is involved with relatively open uses not having
fixed seating—retail stores or sports parks, for example.
Absent clearly measurable occupancy numbers, other sources must be relied upon to estimate the number
of people in a proposed development.
Survey of Similar Uses
A survey of similar uses already in existence is one option. Gathering data in this manner can be time-
consuming and costly, however. Also, unless the survey sample is sufficiently large and conducted at
various times, inconsistent numbers may result. Except for uncommon uses for which occupancy levels
cannot be estimated through other means, surveys are most appropriate as supplemental information.
Maximum Occupancy
A second option for estimating the number of people who will be on a site is to rely upon data indicating
the maximum occupancy of a building measured in terms of Occupancy Load Factor —the number of
square feet per occupant. The number of people on the site, assuming limited outdoor or peripheral uses,
can be calculated by dividing the total floor area of a proposed use by the Occupancy Load Factor. The
Page 360 of 550
APPENDIX D METHODS OF DETERMINING CONCENTRATIONS OF PEOPLE
D–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
challenge of this methodology lies in establishing realistic figures for square feet per occupant. The num-
ber varies greatly from one use to another and, for some uses, has changed over time as well.
A commonly used source of maximum occupancy data is the standards set in the California Building
Code (CBC). The chart reproduced as Table C1 indicates the Occupancy Load Factors for various types
of uses. The CBC, though, is intended primarily for purposes of structural design and fire safety and
represents a legal maximum occupancy in most jurisdictions. A CBC -based methodology consequently
results in occupancy numbers that are higher than normal maximum usage in most instances. The num-
bers also are based upon usable floor area and do not take into account corridors, stairs, building equip-
ment rooms, and other functions that are part of a building’s gross square footage. Surveys of actual
Occupancy Load Factors conducted by various agencies have indicated that many retail and office uses
are generally occupied at no more than 50% of their maximum occupancy levels, even at the busiest times
of day. Therefore, the Handbook indicates that the number of people calculated for office and retail uses
can usually be divided in half to reflect the actual occupancy levels before making the final people -per-
acre determination. Even with this adjustment, the CBC-based methodology typically produces intensities
at the high end of the likely range.
Another source of data on square footage per occupant comes from the facility management industry.
The data is used to help businesses determine how much buildin g space they need to build or lease and
thus tends to be more generous than the CBC standards. The numbers vary not only by the type of
facility, as with the CBC, but also by type of industry. The following are selected examples of square
footage per employee gathered from a variety of sources.
Land Use Category Square Feet per Employee
Call centers 150 – 175
Typical offices 180 – 250
Law, finance, real estate offices 300 – 325
Research & development, light industry 300 – 500
Health services 500
The numbers above do not take into account the customers who may also be present for certain uses.
For retail business, dining establishments, theaters, and other uses where customers outnumber employ-
ees, either direct measures of occupancy—the number of seats, for example—or other methodologies
must be used to estimate the potential number of people on the site.
Parking Space Requirements
For many jurisdictions and a wide variety of uses, the number of people present on a site can be calculated
based upon the number of automobile parking spaces that are required. Certain limitations and assump-
tions must be considered when applying this methodology, however. An obvious limitation is that parking
space requirements can be correlated with occupancy numbers only where nearly all users arrive by pri-
vate vehicle rather than by public transportation, walking, or other method. Secondly, the jurisdiction
needs to have a well-defined parking ordinance that lists parking space requirements for a wide range of
land uses. For most uses, these requirements are typically stated in terms of the number of parking spaces
Page 361 of 550
METHODS OF DETERMINING CONCENTRATIONS OF PEOPLE APPENDIX D
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) D–3
that must be provided per 1,000 square feet of gross building size or a similar ratio. Lastly, assumptions
must be made with regard to the average number of people who will arrive in each car.
Both of the critical ratios associated with this methodology—parking spaces to building size and occu-
pants to vehicles—vary from one jurisdiction to another even for the same types of uses. Research of
local ordinances and other sources, though, indicates that the following ratios are typical.
▪ Parking Space Ratios—These examples of required parking space requirements are typical of those
found in ordinances adopted by urban and suburban jurisdictions. The numbers are ratios of spaces
required per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Gross floor area is normally measured to the outside
surfaces of a building and includes all floor levels as well as stairways, elevators, storage, and mechan-
ical rooms
Land Use Category Parking Space per 1,000 Square Feet
Small Restaurants 10.0
Medical Offices 4.0 – 5.7
Shopping Centers 4.0 – 5.0
Health Clubs 3.3 – 5.0
Business Professional Offices 3.3 – 4.0
Retail Stores 3.0 – 3.5
Research & Development 2.5 – 4.0
Manufacturing 2.0 – 2.5
Furniture, Building Supply Stores 0.7 – 1.0
▪ Vehicle Occupancy—Data indicating the average number of people occupying each vehicle parking
at a particular business or other land use can be found in various transportation surveys. T he numbers
vary both from one community or region to another and over time, thus current local data is best if
available. The following data represent typical vehicle occupancy for different trip purposes.
Vehicle Trip Purpose Vehicle Occupancy (People per Vehicle)
Work 1.05 – 1.2
Education 1.2 – 2.0
Medical 1.5 – 1.7
Shopping 1.5 – 1.8
Dining, Social, Recreational 1.7 – 2.3
Page 362 of 550
APPENDIX D METHODS OF DETERMINING CONCENTRATIONS OF PEOPLE
D–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
U SAGE I NTENSITY R ELATIONSHIP TO O THER D EVELOPMENT M EASURES
Calculating Usage Intensities
Once the number of people expected in a particular development—both over the entire site and within
individual buildings—has been estimated, the usage intensity can be calculated. The criteria in this
UKIALUCP are measured in terms of the average intensity over the entire project site.
The average intensity is calculated by dividing the total number of people on the site by the site size. A
10-acre site expected to be occupied by as many as 1,000 people at a time, thus would have an average
intensity of 100 people per acre. The site size equals the total size of the parcel or parcels to be developed.
Having calculated the usage intensities of a proposed development, a comparison can be made with the
criteria set forth in the UKIALUCP to determine whether the proposal is consistent or inconsistent with
the policies. Table D2 shows sample calculations.
Comparison with Parking Space Requirements
As discussed above, many jurisdictions have adopted parking space requirements that vary from one land
use type to another. Factoring in an estimated vehicle occupancy rate for various land uses as described
earlier, the Occupancy Load Factor can be calculated. For example, a typical parking space requirement
for office uses is 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet or 1 space per 250 square feet. If each vehicle is assumed
to be occupied by 1.1 persons, the equivalent Occupancy Load Factor would be 1 person per 227 square
feet. This number falls squarely within the range noted above that was found through separate research
of norms used by the facility management industry.
As an added note, the Occupancy Load Factor of 215 square feet per person for office uses indicated in
Table 3A, Basic Compatibility Criteria, is slightly more conservative than the above calculation produces.
This means that, for a given usage intensity standard, the FAR limit in Table 3A is slightly more restrictive
than would result from a higher Occupancy Load Factor.
Comparison with Floor Area Ratio
Usage intensity or “people per acre” used in compatibility planning is not a common metric in other
facets of land use planning. Floor area ratio or FAR —the gross square footage of the buildings on a site
divided by the site size—is a more common measure in land use planning. Some counties and cities adopt
explicit FAR limits in their zoning ordinance or other policies. Those that do not set FAR limits often
have other requirements such as, a maximum number of floors a building can have, minimum setback
distances from the property line, and minimum number of parking spaces. These requirements effectively
limit the floor area ratio as well.
From a safety compatibility standpoint, a major shortcoming of FAR is that it does not directly correlate
with risks to people because different types of buildings with the same FAR can have vastly different
numbers of people inside—a low-intensity warehouse versus a high-intensity restaurant, for example. For
FAR to be applied as a factor in setting development limitations, assumptions must be made as to how
much space each person (employees and others) in the building will occupy.
Table 3A, which provides compatibility evaluations for specific types of land uses, utilizes the more
common measure of floor area ratio (FAR) as a means of implementing the usage intensity criteria on
Page 363 of 550
METHODS OF DETERMINING CONCENTRATIONS OF PEOPLE APPENDIX D
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) D–5
the local level. Table 3A indicates the assumed Occupancy Load Factor for various land uses. Mathe-
matically, the relationship between usage intensity and FAR is:
FAR = (allowable usage intensity) x (Occupancy Load Factor)
43,560
where usage intensity is measured in terms of people per acre and Occupancy Load Factor as square feet
per person.
For single-use projects (e.g., industrial facility), a project may be tested for compliance by directly com-
paring the proposed floor area ratio of the project with the maximum floor area ratio limit indicated for
the land use category and compatibility zone. If the proposed floor area ratio exceeds the floor area ratio
limit, the project is incompatible unless modified to ensure compliance with the intensity criteria.
For projects involving multiple nonresidential land use categories (e.g., office and retail), each component
use must be assigned a share of the overall project site. Typically, this share is assumed to be the same as
the component use’s share of the total project floor area. Then, each component floor area ratio is com-
pared with the maximum floor area ratio limit indicated for the land use category and compatibility zone.
Page 364 of 550
APPENDIX D METHODS OF DETERMINING CONCENTRATIONS OF PEOPLE
D–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Table D1
Occupant Load Factors
California Building Code
Page 365 of 550
METHODS OF DETERMINING CONCENTRATIONS OF PEOPLE APPENDIX D
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) D–7
Table D2
Sample People-Per-Acre Calculations
Example 1
Proposed Development: Two office buildings, each two stories and containing 20,000 square feet of floor
area per building. Site size is 3.0 net acres. Counting a portion of the adjacent road, the gross area of the
site is 3.5± acres.
A. Calculation Based on Parking Space Requirements
For office uses, assume that a county or city parking ordinance requires 1 parking space for every
300 square feet of floor area. Data from traffic studies or other sources can be used to estimate the
average vehicle occupancy. For the purposes of this example, the typical vehicle occupancy is as-
sumed to equal 1.5 people per vehicle.
The average usage intensity would therefore be calculated as follows:
1) 40,000 sq. ft. floor area x 1.0 parking space per 300 sq. ft. = 134 required parking spaces
2) 134 parking spaces x 1.5 people per space = 201 people maximum on site
3) 201 people 3.5 acres gross site size = 57 people per acre average for the site
B. Calculation Based on Uniform Building Code
Using the UBC (Table D1) as the basis for estimating building occupancy yields the following results
for the above example:
1) 40,000 sq. ft. bldg. 100 sq. ft./occupant = 400 people max. bldg. occu pancy (under UBC)
2) 400 max. bldg. occupancy x 50% adjustment = 200 people maximum on site
3) 200 people 3.5 acres gross site size = 57 people per acre average for the site
C. Calculation of Single Acre Intensity
Assuming that occupancy of each building is relatively equal throughout, but that there is some sepa -
ration between the buildings and outdoor uses are minimal, the usage intensity for a single acre
would be estimated to be:
1) 20,000 sq. ft. bldg. 2 stories = 10,000 sq. ft. bldg. footprint
2) 10,000 sq. ft. bldg. footprint 43,560 sq. ft. per acre = 0.23 acre bldg. footprint
3) Building footprint < 1.0 acre; therefore maximum people in 1 acre = bldg. occupancy =
100 people per single acre (i.e., 200 people max. on site 2 bldgs.)
Conclusions: In this instance, both methodologies yield the same results. For different uses and/or dif-
ferent assumptions, the two methodologies are likely to produce different numbers. In most such cases,
the UBC methodology will indicate a higher intensity. The 57 people per average acre and the 100 people
per single acre results must be compared with the intensity limits provided in the Basic Compatibility Cri-
teria table in this UKIALUCP.
Page 366 of 550
APPENDIX D METHODS OF DETERMINING CONCENTRATIONS OF PEOPLE
D–8 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Table D2, Continued
Example 2
Proposed Development: Single-floor furniture store containing 24,000 square feet of floor area on a site of
2.0 gross acres and the net acreage (less internal roadways) is 1.7 acres.
A. Calculation Based on Parking Space Requirements
For furniture stores, assume that a county or city parking ordinance requires 1 parking space per
1,500 square feet of use area. Assuming 1.5 people per automobile results in the following intensity
estimates:
The average usage intensity would be:
1) 24,000 sq. ft. bldg. x 1.0 parking space per 1,500 sq. ft. = 16 required parking spaces
2) 16 parking spaces x 1.5 people per space = 24 people maximum on site
3) 24 people 2.0 acres gross site size = 12 people per acre average for the site
B. Calculation Based on Uniform Building Code
For the purposes of the UBC-based methodology, the furniture store is assumed to consist of 50%
retail sales floor (at 30 square feet per occupant) and 50% warehouse (at 500 square feet per occu-
pant). Usage intensities would therefore be estimated as follows:
1) 12,000 sq. ft. retail floor area 30 sq. ft./occupant = 400 people max. occupancy in retail
area
2) 12,000 sq. ft. warehouse floor area 500 sq. ft./occupant = 24 people max. occupancy in
warehouse area
3) Maximum occupancy under UBC assumptions = 400 + 24 = 424 people
4) Assuming typical peak occupancy is 50% of UBC numbers = 212 people maximum on site
5) 212 people 2.0 acres = 106 people per acre average for the site
C. Calculation for Single Acre Intensity
With respect to the single-acre intensity criteria, the entire building occupancy would again be within
less than 1.0 acre, thus yielding the same intensity of 24 or 212 people per single acre.
Again, assuming a relatively balanced occupancy throughout the building and that outdoor uses are
minimal, the usage intensity for a single acre would be estimated to be:
1) 24,000 sq. ft. bldg. footprint 43,560 sq. ft. per acre = 0.55 acre bldg. footprint
3) Building footprint < 1.0 acre; therefore, maximum people in 1 acre = bldg. occupancy =
24 or 212 people per single acre under parking space or UBC methodology, respectively
Conclusions: In this instance, the two methods produce very different resul ts. The occupancy estimate of
30 square feet per person is undoubtedly low for a furniture store even after the 50% adjustment. On the
other hand, the 12 people-per-acre estimate using the parking requirement methodology appears low,
but is probably closer to being realistic. Unless better data is available from surveys of similar uses, this
proposal should reasonably be considered compatible within most compatibility zones, except Zone A
and possibly Zone B1.
Page 367 of 550
A P P E N D I X E
Project Referral Form
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) E–1
APPLICATION FOR MAJOR LAND USE ACTION REVIEW MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
ALUC Identification
No.
PROJECT PROPONENT (TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT)
Date of Application
Property Owner Phone Number
Mailing Address
Agent (if any) Phone Number
Mailing Address
PROJECT LOCATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT)
Attach an accurately scaled map showing the relationship of the project site to the airport boundary and runways
Street Address
Assessor’s Parcel No. Parcel Size
Subdivision Name Zoning
Classification
Lot Number
PROJECT DESCRIPTION (TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT)
If applicable, attach a detailed site plan showing ground elevations, the location of structures, open spaces and water bodies, and the
heights of structures and trees; include additional project description data as needed
Existing Land Use
(describe)
Proposed Land Use
(describe)
For Residential Uses Number of Parcels or Units on Site (include secondary units)
For Other Land Uses Hours of Use
Number of People Maximum Number
On Site… Method of Calculation
Height Data Height above Ground or Tallest Object (including antennas and trees) ft.
Highest Elevation (above sea level) of Any Object or Terrain on Site ft.
Flight Hazards Does the project involve any characteristics which could create electrical Yes
Interference, confusing lights, glare, smoke, or other electrical or visual No
hazards to aircraft flight?
If yes, describe
Page 368 of 550
APPENDIX E REFERRAL FORM
E–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
REFERRING AGENCY (TO BE COMPLETED BY AGENCY STAFF)
Date Received Type of Project
Agency Name General Plan Amendment
Zoning Amendment or Variance
Staff Contact Subdivision Approval
Phone Number Use Permit
Agency’s Project
No.
Public Facility
Other
ALUC SECRETARY’S REVIEW (TO BE COMPLETED BY ALUC SECRETARY)
Application Date Received By
Receipt Is Application Complete? Yes No
If no, cite reasons
Primary Compatibility Zone(s) 1 2 3 4
Criteria Compatibility Zone(s) 5 6 Other Airport Environs
Review Allowable (not prohibited) Use? Yes No
Density/Intensity Acceptable? Yes No
Open Land Requirement Met? Yes No
Height Acceptable? Yes No
Easement/Deed Notice Provided? Yes No
Special Conditions Describe:
Supplemental Noise
Criteria
Review Safety
Airspace Protection
Overflight
ACTIONS TAKEN (TO BE COMPLETED BY ALUC SECRETARY)
ALUC Secretary’s Approve Date
Action Refer to ALUC
ALUC Consistent Date
Action Consistent with Conditions (list conditions/attach additional pages if needed)
Inconsistent (list reasons/attach additional pages if needed)
Page 369 of 550
A P P E N D I X F
General Plan Consistency Checklist
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) F–1
Compatibility planning issues can be reflected in a general plan in any, or a combination, of several ways:
▪ Incorporate Policies into Existing General Plan Elements. One method of achieving the nec-
essary planning consistency is to modify existing general plan elements. For example, airport land use
noise policies could be inserted into the noise element, safety policies could be placed into a safety
element and the primary compatibility criteria and associated maps plus the procedural policies might
fit into the land use element. With this approach, direct conflicts would be eliminated and the majority
of the mechanisms and procedures to ensure compliance with compatibility criteria could be fully
incorporated into a local jurisdiction’s general plan.
▪ Adopt a General Plan Airport Element. Another approach is to prepare a separate airport element
of the general plan. Such a format may be advantageous when a community’s general plan also needs
to address on-airport development and operational issues. Modification of other plan elements to
provide cross referencing and eliminate conflicts would still be necessary.
▪ Adopt ALUCP as Stand-Alone Document. Jurisdictions selecting this option would simply adopt
as a local policy document the relevant portions of the ALUCP. Changes to the community’s existing
general plan would be minimal. Policy reference to the separate ALUCP document would need to be
added and any direct land use or other conflicts with compatibility planning criteria would have to be
removed. Limited discussion of compatibility planning issues could be included in the general plan,
but the substance of most compatibility policies would appear only in the stand-alone document.
▪ Adopt Airport Combining District or Overlay Zoning Ordinance. This approach is similar to
the stand-alone document except that the local jurisdiction would not explicitly adopt the ALUCP as
policy. Instead, the compatibility policies would be restructured as an airport combining or overlay
zoning ordinance. A combining zone serves as an overlay of standard community-wide land use zones
and modifies or limits the uses permitted by the underlying zone. Flood hazard combining zoning is
a common example. An airport combining zone ordinance can serve as a convenient means of
bringing various airport compatibility criteria into one place. The airport-related height-limit zoning
that many jurisdictions have adopted as a means of protecting airport airspace is a form of combining
district zoning. Noise and safety compatibility criteria, together with procedural policies, would need
to be added to create a complete airport compatibility zoning ordinance. Other than where direct
conflicts need to be eliminated from the local plans, implementation of the compatibility policies
would be accomplished solely through the zoning ordinance. Policy reference to airport compatibility
in the general plan could be as simple as mentioning support for the airport land use commission and
stating that policy implementation is by means of the combining zone.
Page 370 of 550
APPENDIX F GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST
F–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This checklist is intended to assist counties and cities with modifications necessary to make their local general plans and
other local policies consistent with the ALUC’s compatibility plan. It is also designed to facilitate ALUC reviews of these
local plans and policies.
COMPATIBILITY CRITERIA
General Plan Document
The following items typically appear directly in a general
plan document. Amendment of the general plan will be re-
quired if there are any conflicts with the compatibility plan.
▪ Land Use Map. No direct conflicts should exist between
proposed new land uses indicated on a general plan land
use map and the ALUC land use compatibility criteria.
Residential densities (dwelling units per acre) should
not exceed the set limits. Differences between gross
and net densities and the potential for secondary
dwellings on single parcels (see below) may need to
be taken into account.
Proposed nonresidential development needs to be
assessed with respect to applicable intensity limits
(see below).
No new land uses of a type listed as specifically pro-
hibited should be shown within affected areas.
▪ Noise Element. General plan noise elements typically
include criteria indicating the maximum noise exposure
for which residential development is normally acceptable.
This limit must be made consistent with the equivalent
compatibility plan criteria. Note, however, that a general
plan may establish a different limit with respect to avia-
tion-related noise than for noise from other sources (this
may be appropriate in that aviation-related noise is some-
times judged to be more objectionable than other types
of equally loud noises).
Zoning or Other Policy Documents
The following items need to be reflected either in the gen-
eral plan or in a separate policy document such as a com-
bining zone ordinance. If a separate policy document is
adopted, modification of the general plan to achieve con-
sistency with the compatibility plan may not be required.
Modifications would normally be needed only to eliminate
any conflicting language which may be present and to
make reference to the separate policy document.
▪ Accessory Dwellings. State law limits restrictions on ac-
cessory residential dwellings. As such, these dwellings,
if in conformance with state law, should not be included
in residential density calculations.
Zoning or Other Policy Documents, Continued
▪ Intensity Limitations on Nonresidential Uses. Local pol-
icies must establish limits on the usage intensities of com-
mercial, industrial, and other nonresidential land uses. This
can be done by duplication of the performance-oriented
criteria—specifically, the number of people per acre—indi-
cated in the compatibility plan. Alternatively, local jurisdic-
tions may create a detailed list of land uses which are al-
lowable and/or not allowable within each compatibility
zone. For certain land uses, such a list may need to include
limits on building sizes, floor area ratios, habitable floors,
and/or other design parameters which are equivalent to the
usage intensity criteria.
▪ Identification of Prohibited Uses. Compatibility plans
may prohibit schools, day care centers, assisted living cen-
ters, hospitals, and certain other uses within much of an
airport’s influence area. The facilities often are permitted
or conditionally permitted uses within many commercial or
industrial land use designations. Policies need to be estab-
lished which preclude these uses in accordance with the
compatibility criteria.
▪ Open Land Requirements. ALUCP requirements, if any,
for assuring that a minimum amount of open land is pre-
served in the airport vicinity must be reflected in local poli-
cies. Normally, the locations which are intended to be
maintained as open land would be identified on a map with
the total acreage within each compatibility zone indicated.
If some of the area included as open land is private prop-
erty, then policies must be established which assure that
the open land will continue to exist as the property devel-
ops. Policies specifying the required characteristics of eli-
gible open land should also be established
▪ Infill Development. If an ALUCP contains infill policies
and a jurisdiction wishes to take advantage of them, the
lands that meet the qualifications must be shown on a
map.
Source: California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (October 2011)
Page 371 of 550
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST APPENDIX F
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) F-3
Zoning or Other Policy Documents, Continued
▪ Height Limitations and Other Hazards to Flight. To
protect the airport airspace, limitations must be set on the
height of structures and other objects near airports.
These limitations are to be based upon CFR Part 77. Re-
strictions also must be established on other land use
characteristics which can cause hazards to flight (specif-
ically, visual or electronic interference with navigation
and uses which attract birds). Note that many jurisdic-
tions have already adopted an airport-related hazard and
height limit zoning ordinance which, if up to date, will sat-
isfy this consistency requirement.
▪ Buyer Awareness Measures. Besides disclosure rules
already required by state law, as a condition for approval
of development within certain compatibility zones, some
ALUCPs require either dedication of an avigation ease-
ment to the airport proprietor or placement on deeds of a
notice regarding airport impacts. If so, local agency poli-
cies must contain similar requirements.
▪ Nonconforming Uses and Reconstruction. Local
agency policies regarding nonconforming uses and re-
construction must be equivalent to or more restrictive
than those in the ALUCP, if any.
REVIEW PROCEDURES
In addition to incorporation of ALUC compatibility criteria,
local agency implementing documents must specify the
manner in which development proposals will be reviewed
for consistency with the compatibility criteria.
▪ Actions Always Required to be Submitted for ALUC
Review. PUC Section 21676 identifies the types of ac-
tions that must be submitted for airport land use commis-
sion review. Local policies should either list these actions
or, at a minimum, note the local agency’s intent to comply
with the state statute.
▪ Other Land Use Actions Potentially Subject to ALUC
Review. In addition to the above actions, ALUCPs may
identify certain major land use actions for which referral
to the ALUC is dependent upon agreement between the
local agency and ALUC. If the local agency fully complies
with all of the items in this general plan consistency
checklist or has taken the necessary steps to overrule the
ALUC, then referral of the additional actions is voluntary.
On the other hand, a local agency may elect not to incor-
porate all of the necessary compatibility criteria and re-
view procedures into its own policies. In this case, referral
of major land use actions to the ALUC is mandatory. Lo-
cal policies should indicate the local agency’s intentions
in this regard.
▪ Process for Compatibility Reviews by Local Jurisdic-
tions. If a local agency chooses to submit only the man-
datory actions for ALUC review, then it must establish a
policy indicating the procedures which will be used to as-
sure that airport compatibility criteria are addressed dur-
ing review of other projects. Possibilities include: a stand-
ard review procedure checklist which includes reference
to compatibility criteria; use of a geographic information
system to identify all parcels within the airport influence
area; etc.
▪ Variance Procedures. Local procedures for granting of
variances to the zoning ordinance must make certain that
any such variances do not result in a conflict with the
compatibility criteria. Any variance that involves issues of
noise, safety, airspace protection, or overflight compati-
bility as addressed in the ALUCP must be referred to the
ALUC for review.
▪ Enforcement. Policies must be established to assure
compliance with compatibility criteria during the lifetime
of the development. Enforcement procedures are espe-
cially necessary with regard to limitations on usage inten-
sities and the heights of trees. An airport combining dis-
trict zoning ordinance is one means of implementing en-
forcement requirements.
Source: California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (October 2011)
2
Page 372 of 550
APPENDIX F GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST
F–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This page left intentionally blank
Page 373 of 550
A P P E N D I X G
Sample Implementation Documents
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) G–1
The responsibility for implementation of the compatibility criteria set forth in this UKIALUCP rests
largely with the ALUC and the local jurisdictions: Mendocino County and the city of Ukiah. As described
in Appendix F, modification of general plans and specific plans for consistency with the ALUCP is the
major step in this process. However, not all of the measures necessary for achievement of airport land
use compatibility are necessarily included in general plans and specific plans. Other types of documents
also serve to implement the ALUCP policies. Samples of such implementation documents are included
in this appendix.
Airport Combining Zone Ordinance
As noted in Chapter 1 of this document, one option that the affected local jurisdictions can utilize to
implement airport land use compatibility criteria and associated policies is adoption of an airport com-
bining zone ordinance. An airport combining zone ordinance is a way of collecting various airport-related
development conditions into one local policy document. Adoption of a combining zone is not required,
but is suggested as an option. Appendix G1 describes some of the potential components of an airport
combining zone ordinance.
Buyer Awareness Measures
Buyer awareness is an umbrella category for several types of implementation documents all of which have
the objective of ensuring that prospective buyers of airport area property, particularly residential property,
are informed about the airport’s impact on the property. The ALUCP policies include each of these
measures.
▪ Avigation Easement. Avigation easements transfer certain property rights from the owner of the
underlying property to the owner of an airport or, in the case of military airports, to a local govern-
ment agency on behalf of the federal government (the U.S. Department of Defense is not authorized
to accept avigation easements). This UKIALUCP requires avigation easement dedication as a condi-
tion for approval of development on property subject to high noise levels or a need to restrict heights
of structures and trees to less than might ordinarily occur on the property. Specifically, the easement
dedication requirement applies to development within Compatibility Zones 1, 1*, 2, and 3 and the Height
Review Overlay Zone. A sample of a standard avigation easement is included in Appendix G2.
▪ Recorded Overflight Notification. An overflight notification informs property owners that the
property is subject to aircraft overflight and generation of noise and other impacts. No restrictions
on the heights of objects, requirements for marking or lighting of objects, or access to the property
for these purposes are included. An overflight notification serves only as buyer acceptance of over-
flight conditions. Appendix G3 outlines typical language of an overflight easement. Unlike an aviga-
tion easement, an overflight notification is not a conveyance of property rights. They merely memo-
rialize the right of aircraft to overfly a property near an airport and to cause noise and other impacts
associated with normal flight. However, like an easement, an overflight notification is recorded on
the property deed and therefore remains in effect with the sale of the property to subsequent owners.
▪ Real Estate Disclosure. A less definitive, but more all-encompassing, form of buyer awareness
measure is for the ALUC and local jurisdictions to establish a policy indicating that information about
and airport’s influence area should be disclosed to prospective buyers of all airport-vicinity properties
Page 374 of 550
APPENDIX G SAMPLE IMPLEMENTATION DOCUMENTS
G–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
prior to transfer of title. The advantage of this type of program is that it applies to previously existing
land uses as well as to new development. The requirement for disclosure of information about the
proximity of an airport has been present in state law for some time, but legislation adopted in 2002
and effective in January 2004 explicitly ties the requirement to the airport influence areas established
by airport land use commissions (see Appendix A for excerpts from sections of the Business and
Professions Code and Civil Code that define these requirements). With certain exceptions, these stat-
utes require disclosure of a property’s location within an airport influence area under any of the fol-
lowing three circumstances: (1) sale or lease of subdivided lands; (2) sale of common interest devel-
opments; and (3) sale of residential real property. In each case, the disclosure statement to be used is
defined by state law as follows:
NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY
This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as
an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the
annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for ex-
ample: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary
from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are
associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine
whether they are acceptable to you.
Page 375 of 550
SAMPLE IMPLEMENTATION DOCUMENTS APPENDIX G
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) G–3
Table G1
Sample Airport Combining Zone Components
An airport compatibility combining zoning ordinance might include some or all of the following components:
▪ Airspace Protection. A combining district can establish
restrictions on the height of buildings, antennas, trees,
and other objects as necessary to protect the airspace
needed for operation of the airport. These restrictions
should be based upon the current version of Title 14
Code of Federal Regulations Part 77 14CFR77, Safe, Ef-
ficient Use, and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace ,
Subpart C. Additions or adjustment to take into account
instrument approach (TERPS) surfaces should be made
as necessary. Provisions prohibiting smoke, glare, bird
attractions, and other hazards to flight should also be in-
cluded.
▪ FAA Notification Requirements. Combining districts
also can be used to ensure that project developers are
informed about the need for compliance with the notifica-
tion requirements of 14CFR77. Subpart B of the regula-
tions requires that the proponent of any project which ex-
ceeds a specified set of height criteria submit a Notice of
Proposed Construction or Alteration (Form 7460-1) to the
Federal Aviation Administration prior to commencement
of construction. The height criteria associated with this
notification requirement are lower than those spelled out
in 14CFR77, Subpart C, which define airspace obstruc-
tions. The purpose of the notification is to determine if the
proposed construction would constitute a potential haz-
ard or obstruction to flight. Notification is not required for
proposed structures that would be shielded by existing
structures or by natural terrain of equal or greater height,
where it is obvious that the proposal would not adversely
affect air safety.
▪ Maximum Densities/Intensities. Airport noise and
safety compatibility criteria are frequently expressed in
terms of dwelling units per acre for residential uses and
people per acre for other land uses. These standards can
either be directly included in a combining zone or used to
modify the underlying land use designations. For residen-
tial land uses, the correlation between the compatibility
criteria and land use designations is direct. For other land
uses, the method of calculating the intensity limitations
needs to be defined. Alternatively, a matrix can be estab-
lished indicating whether each specific type of land use
is compatible with each compatibility zone. To be useful,
the land use categories need to be more detailed than
typically provided by general plan or zoning ordinance
land use designations.
▪ Open Areas for Emergency Landing of Aircraft. In
most circumstances in which an accident involving a
small aircraft occurs near an airport, the aircraft is under
control as it descends. When forced to make an off -air-
port emergency landing, pilots will usually attempt to
do so in the most open areas readily available. To en-
hance safety both for people on the ground and the oc-
cupants of the aircraft, airport compatibility plans often
contain criteria requiring a certain amount of open land
near airports. These criteria are most effectively carried
out by planning at the general or specific plan level, but
may also need to be included in a combining district so
that they will be applied to development of large parcels.
Adequate open areas can often be provided by cluster-
ing of development on adjacent land.
▪ State Regulation of Obstructions. State law prohibits
anyone from constructing or altering a structure or alter-
ing a structure or permitting an object of natural growth
to exceed the heights established by 14CFR77, Subpart
C, unless the FAA has determined the object would or
does not constitute a hazard to air navigation (Public Util-
ities Code, Section 21659). Additionally, a permit from
the Department of Transportation is required for any
structure taller than 500 feet above the ground unless the
height is reviewed and approved by the Federal Commu-
nications Commission or the FAA (Section 21656).
▪ Designation of High Noise-Impact Areas. California
state statutes require that multi-family residential struc-
tures in high-noise exposure areas be constructed so as
to limit the interior noise to a Community Noise Equiva-
lent Level of no more than 45 dB. A combining district
could be used to indicate the locations where special
construction techniques may be necessary in order to en-
sure compliance with this requirement. The combining
district also could extend this criterion to single-family
dwellings.
▪ Areas of Special Compatibility Concern. A significant
drawback of standard general plan and zoning ordinance
land use designations is that they can be changed. Uses
that are currently compatible are not assured of staying
that way in the future. Designation of areas of special
compatibility concern would serve as a reminder that air-
port impacts should be carefully considered in any deci-
sion to change the existing land use designation. [A legal
consideration which supports the value of this concept is
that down-zoning of a property to a less intensive use is
becoming more difficult. It is much better not to have in-
appropriately up-zoned the property in the first place.]
▪ Real Estate Disclosure Policies. The geographic ex-
tent and specific language of recommended real estate
disclosure statements can be described in an airport
combining zone ordinance.
Source: California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (October 2011)
Page 376 of 550
APPENDIX G SAMPLE IMPLEMENTATION DOCUMENTS
G–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Table G2
Typical Avigation Easement
TYPICAL AVIGATION EASEMENT
[Insert Airport Name]
This indenture made this _____ day of ____________, 20__, between _________________________ herein-
after referred to as Grantor, and the [Insert Name of Airport Owner], hereinafter referred to as Grantee.
The Grantor, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged,
does hereby grant to the Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual and assignable easement over the fol-
lowing described parcel of land in which the Grantor holds a fee simple estate. The property which is subject to
this easement is depicted as _____________________ on “Exhibit A” attached and is more particularly de-
scribed as follows:
[Insert Legal Description of Real Property]
The easement applies to the Airspace above an imaginary plane over the real property. The plane is described as
follows:
The imaginary plane above the hereinbefore described real property, as such plane is defined by Part 77 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, and consists of a plane [describe approach, transition, or horizontal surface]; the
elevation of said plane being based upon the [Insert Airport Name] official runway end elevation of _____ feet
Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL), as determined by [Insert Name and Date of Survey or Airport Layout Plan that
determines the elevation] the approximate dimensions of which said plane are described and shown on Exhibit
A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
The aforesaid easement and right-of-way includes, but is not limited to:
(1) For the use and benefit of the public, the easement and continuing right to fly, or cause or permit the
flight by any and all persons, or any aircraft, of any and all kinds now or hereafter known, in, through,
across, or about any portion of the Airspace hereinabove described; and
(2) The easement and right to cause or create, or permit or allow to be caused and created within all space
above the existing surface of the hereinabove described real property and any and all Airspace laterally
adjacent to said real property, such noise, vibration, currents and other effects of air illumination and
fuel consumption as may be inherent in, or may arise or occur from or during the operation of aircraft
of any and all kinds, now or hereafter known or used, for navigation of or flight in air; and
(3) A continuing right to clear and keep clear from the Airspace any portions of buildings, structures or
improvements of any kinds, and of trees or other objects, including the right to remove or demolish
those portions of such buildings, structures, improvements, trees, or other things which extend into or
above said Airspace, and the right to cut to the ground level and remove, any trees which extend into or
above the Airspace; and
(4) The right to mark and light, or cause or require to be marked and lighted, as obstructions to air naviga-
tion, any and all buildings, structures or other improvements, and trees or other objects, which extend
into or above the Airspace; and
(5) The right of ingress to, passage within, and egress from the hereinabove described real property, for the
purposes described in subparagraphs (3) and (4) above at reasonable times and after reasonable notice.
Page 377 of 550
SAMPLE IMPLEMENTATION DOCUMENTS APPENDIX G
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) G–5
Table G2, continued
For and on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, the Grantor hereby covenants with the Grantee, for the
direct benefit of the real property constituting the [Insert Airport Name] hereinafter described, that neither the
Grantor, nor its successors in interest or assigns will construct, install, erect, place or grow, in or upon the here-
inabove described real property, nor will they permit or allow any building structure, improvement, tree, or other
object to extend into or above the Airspace so as to constitute an obstruction to air navigation or to obstruct or
interfere with the use of the easement and rights-of-way herein granted.
The easements and rights-of-way herein granted shall be deemed both appurtenant to and for the direct benefit
of that real property which constitutes the [Insert Airport Name], in the [Insert County or City Name], State of
California; and shall further be deemed in gross, being conveyed to the Grantee for the benefit the Grantee and
any and all members of the general public who may use said easement or right-of-way, in landing at, taking off
from or operating such aircraft in or about the [Insert Airport Name], or in otherwise flying through said Air-
space.
Grantor, together with its successors in interest and assigns, hereby waives its right to legal action against Grantee,
its successors or assigns for monetary damages or other redress due to impacts, as described in paragraph (2) of
the granted rights of easement, associated with aircraft operations in the air or on the ground at the airport,
including future increases in the volume or changes in location of said operations. Furthermore, Grantee, its
successors, and assigns shall have no duty to avoid or mitigate such damages through physical modification of
airport facilities or establishment or modification of aircraft operational procedures or restrictions. However, this
waiver shall not apply if the airport role or character of its usage (as identified in an adopted airport master plan,
for example) changes in a fundamental manner which could not reasonably have been anticipated at the time of
the granting of this easement and which results in a substantial increase in the in the impacts associated with
aircraft operations. Also, this grant of easement shall not operate to deprive the Grantor, its successors or assigns
of any rights which may from time to time have against any air carrier or private operator for negligent or unlawful
operation of aircraft.
These covenants and agreements run with the land and are binding upon the heirs, administrators, executors,
successors and assigns of the Grantor, and, for the purpose of this instrument, the real property firstly here-
inabove described is the servient tenement and said [Insert Airport Name] is the dominant tenement.
DATED:
STATE OF }
ss
COUNTY OF }
On _____________________, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State
personally appeared __________________, and ________________ known to me to be the persons whose
names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
__________________________________________________
Notary Public
Source: Modified from California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (October 2011)
Page 378 of 550
APPENDIX G SAMPLE IMPLEMENTATION DOCUMENTS
G–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Table G3
Recorded Overflight Notification
RECORDED OVERFLIGHT NOTIFICATION
This Overflight Notification concerns the real property situated in the County of _______________________ and
the City of _______________________, State of California, described as
__________________________________[APN No.: ------ ].
This Overflight Notification provides notification of the condition of the above described property in recognition
of, and in compliance with, CALIFORNIA BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE Section 11010 and CALIFORNIA
CIVIL CODE Sections 1102.6, 1103.4 and 1353, effective January 1, 2004, and related state and local regulations
and consistent with policies of the Airport Land Use Commission for the overflight notification provided
in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
The Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and [Insert County / City Name] Ordinance (Ordinance
No.___ ) identify the [Insert Airport Name] Airport Influence Area. Properties within this area are
routinely subject to overflights by aircraft using this public-use airport and, as a result, residents may experience
inconvenience, annoyance, or discomfort arising from the noise of such operations. State law (Public Utilities
Code Section 21670 et seq.) establishes the importance of public-use airports to protection of the public interest
of the people of the state of California. Residents of property near such airports should therefore be prepared
to accept the inconvenience, annoyance, or discomfort from normal aircraft operations. Residents also should
be aware that the current volume of aircraft activity may increase in the future in response to population and
economic growth in the County of __________. Any subsequent deed conveying this parcel or subdivisions
thereof shall contain a statement in substantially this form.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has regulatory authority over the operation of aircraft in flight and
on the runway and taxiway surfaces at [Insert Airport Name]. The FAA is, therefore, exclusively responsible for
airspace and air traffic management, including ensuring the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace, devel-
oping air traffic rules, assigning the use of airspace and controlling air traffic. Please contact the FAA for more
detailed information regarding overflight and airspace protection issues associated with the operation of aircraft.
The airport operator, the [Insert Name of Airport Owner], maintains information regarding hours of operation
and other relevant information regarding airport operations. Please contact your local airport operator for more
detailed information regarding airport specific operational issues including hours of operation.
This Overflight Notification shall be duly recorded with the ______ County Assessor’s Office, shall run with the
Property, and shall be binding upon all parties having or acquiring any right, title or interest in the Property.
Effective Date:_________, 20__
Source: Modified from California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (October 2011)
Page 379 of 550
A P P E N D I X H
Glossary of Terms
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) H–1
Above Ground Level (AGL): An elevation datum given in feet above ground level.
Accessory Dwelling: An attached or a detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete inde-
pendent living facilities for one or more persons and is located on a lot with a proposed or existing
primary residence. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanita-
tion on the same parcel as the single-family or multifamily dwelling is or will be situated. (Government
code, Section 65852.2(j)(1))
Air Carriers: The commercial system of air transportation, consisting of the certificated air carriers, air
taxis (including commuters), supplemental air carriers, commercial operators of large aircraft, and air
travel clubs.
Aircraft Accident: An occurrence incident to flight in which, as a result of the operation of an aircraft,
a person (occupant or nonoccupant) receives fatal or serious injury or an aircraft receives substantial
damage.
▪ Except as provided below, substantial damage means damage or structural failure that adversely affects
the structural strength, performance, or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and that would normally
require major repair or replacement of the affected component.
▪ Engine failure, damage limited to an engine, bent fairings or cowling, dented skin, small puncture
holes in the skin or fabric, ground damage to rotor or propeller blades, damage to landing gear,
wheels, tires, flaps, engine accessories, brakes, or wingtips are not considered substantial damage.
Aircraft Incident: A mishap associated with the operation of an aircraft in which neither fatal nor serious
injuries nor substantial damage to the aircraft occurs.
Aircraft Mishap: The collective term for an aircraft accident or an incident.
Aircraft Operation: The airborne movement of aircraft at an airport or about an en route fix or at other
point where counts can be made. There are two types of operations: local and itinerant. An operation is
counted for each landing and each departure, such that a touch-and-go flight is counted as two operations.
(FAA Stats)
Airport: An area of land or water that is used or intended to be used for the landing and taking off of
aircraft, and includes its buildings and facilities if any. (FAR 1)
Airport Elevation: The highest point of an airport’s useable runways, measured in feet above mean sea
level. (AIM)
Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC): A commission authorized under the provisions of California
Public Utilities Code, Section 21670 et seq. and established (in any county within which a public-use
airport is located) for the purpose of promoting compatibility between airports and the land uses sur-
rounding them.
Airport Layout Plan (ALP): A scale drawing of existing and proposed airport facilities, their location
on an airport, and the pertinent clearance and dimensional information required to demonstrate con-
formance with applicable standards.
Page 380 of 550
APPENDIX H GLOSSARY OF TERMS
H–2 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Airport Master Plan (AMP): A long-range plan for development of an airport, including descriptions
of the data and analyses on which the plan is based.
Airport Reference Code (ARC): A coding system used to relate airport design criteria to the operation
and physical characteristics of the airplanes intended to operate at an airport. (Airport Design AC)
Airports, Classes of: For the purposes of issuing a Site Approval Permit, The California Department of
Transportation, Division of Aeronautics classifies airports into the following categories: (CCR)
▪ Agricultural Airport or Heliport: An airport restricted to use only be agricultural aerial applicator aircraft
(FAR Part 137 operators).
▪ Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Landing Site: A site used for the landing and taking off of EMS heli-
copters that is located at or as near as practical to a medical emergency or at or near a medical facility
and
(1) has been designated an EMS landing site by an officer authorized by a public safety agency, as
defined in PUC Section 21662.1, using criteria that the public safety agency has determined is
reasonable and prudent for the safe operation of EMS helicopters and
(2) is used, over any twelve month period, for no more than an average of six landings per month
with a patient or patients on the helicopter, except to allow for adequate medical response to a
mass casualty event even if that response causes the site to be used beyond these limits, and
(3) is not marked as a permitted heliport as described in Section 3554 of these regulations and
(4) is used only for emergency medical purposes.
▪ Heliport on Offshore Oil Platform: A heliport located on a structure in the ocean, not connected to the
shore by pier, bridge, wharf, dock or breakwater, used in the support of petroleum exploration or
production.
▪ Personal-Use Airport: An airport limited to the non-commercial use of an individual owner or family
and occasional invited guests.
▪ Public-Use Airport: An airport that is open for aircraft operations to the general public and is listed in
the current edition of the Airport/Facility Directory that is published by the National Ocean Service of
the U.S. Department of Commerce.
▪ Seaplane Landing Site: An area of water used, or intended for use, for landing and takeoff of seaplanes.
▪ Special-Use Airport or Heliport: An airport not open to the general public, access to which is controlled
by the owner in support of commercial activities, public service operations, and/or personal use.
▪ Temporary Helicopter Landing Site: A site, other than an emergency medical service landing site at or near
a medical facility, which is used for landing and taking off of helicopters and
(1) is used or intended to be used for less than one year, except for recurrent annual events and
(2) is not marked or lighted to be distinguishable as a heliport and
(3) is not used exclusively for helicopter operations.
Ambient Noise Level: The level of noise that is all encompassing within a given environment for which
a single source cannot be determined. It is usually a composite of sounds from many and varied sources
near to and far from the receiver.
Page 381 of 550
GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDIX H
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) H–3
Approach Protection Easement: A form of easement that both conveys all of the rights of an avigation
easement and sets specified limitations on the type of land uses allowed to be developed on the property.
Approach Speed: The recommended speed contained in aircraft manuals used by pilots when making
an approach to landing. This speed will vary for different segments of an approach as well as for aircraft
weight and configuration. (AIM)
Aviation-Related Use: Any facility or activity directly associated with the air transportation of persons
or cargo or the operation, storage, or maintenance of aircraft at an airport or heliport. Such uses specifi-
cally include runways, taxiways, and their associated protected areas defined by the Federal Aviation Ad-
ministration, together with aircraft aprons, hangars, fixed base operations, terminal buildings, etc.
Avigation Easement: A type of easement that typically conveys the following rights:
▪ A right-of-way for free and unobstructed passage of aircraft through the airspace over the property
at any altitude above a surface specified in the easement (usually set in accordance with CFR Part 77
criteria).
▪ A right to subject the property to noise, vibrations, fumes, dust, and fuel particle emissions associated
with normal airport activity.
▪ A right to prohibit the erection or growth of any structure, tree, or other object that would enter the
acquired airspace.
▪ A right-of-entry onto the property, with proper advance notice, for the purpose of removing, mark-
ing, or lighting any structure or other object that enters the acquired airspace.
▪ A right to prohibit electrical interference, glare, misleading lights, visual impairments, and other haz-
ards to aircraft flight from being created on the property.
Based Aircraft: Aircraft stationed at an airport on a long-term basis.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): Statutes adopted by the state legislature for the pur-
pose of maintaining a quality environment for the people of the state now and in the future. The Act
establishes a process for state and local agency review of projects, as defined in the implementing guide-
lines that may adversely affect the environment.
Ceiling: Height above the earth’s surface to the lowest layer of clouds or obscuring phenomena. (AIM)
Circling Approach/Circle-to-Land Maneuver: A maneuver initiated by the pilot to align the aircraft
with a runway for landing when a straight-in landing from an instrument approach is not possible or not
desirable. (AIM)
Combining District: A zoning district that establishes development standards in areas of special concern
over and above the standards applicable to basic underlying zoning districts.
Commercial Activities: Airport-related activities that may offer a facility, service or commodity for sale,
hire or profit. Examples of commodities for sale are: food, lodging, entertainment, real estate, petroleum
products, parts and equipment. Examples of services are: flight training, charter flights, maintenance,
aircraft storage, and tiedown. (CCR)
Commercial Operator: A person who, for compensation or hire, engages in the carriage by aircraft in
air commerce of persons or property, other than as an air carrier. (FAR 1)
Page 382 of 550
APPENDIX H GLOSSARY OF TERMS
H–4 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): The noise metric adopted by the State of California
for evaluating airport noise. It represents the average daytime noise level during a 24-hour day, adjusted
to an equivalent level to account for the lower tolerance of people to noise during evening and nighttime
periods relative to the daytime period. (State Airport Noise Standards)
Compatibility Plan: As used herein, a plan, usually adopted by an Airport Land Use Commission that
sets forth policies for promoting compatibility between airports and the land uses that surround them.
Often referred to as a Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP).
Controlled Airspace: Any of several types of airspace within which some or all aircraft may be subject
to air traffic control. (FAR 1)
Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL): The noise metric adopted by the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency for measurement of environmental noise. It represents the average daytime noise level
during a 24-hour day, measured in decibels and adjusted to account for the lower tolerance of people to
noise during nighttime periods. The mathematical symbol is Ldn.
Decibel (dB): A unit measuring the magnitude of a sound, equal to the logarithm of the ratio of the
intensity of the sound to the intensity of an arbitrarily chosen standard sound, specifically a sound just
barely audible to an unimpaired human ear. For environmental noise from aircraft and other transporta-
tion sources, an A-weighted sound level (abbreviated dBA) is normally used. The A-weighting scale adjusts
the values of different sound frequencies to approximate the auditory sensitivity of the human ear.
Deed Notice: A formal statement added to the legal description of a deed to a property and on any
subdivision map. As used in airport land use planning, a deed notice would state that the property is
subject to aircraft overflights. Deed notices are used as a form of buyer notification as a means of ensuring
that those who are particularly sensitive to aircraft overflights can avoid moving to the affected areas.
Designated Body: A local government entity, such as a regional planning agency or a county planning
commission, chosen by the county board of supervisors and the selection committee of city mayors to
act in the capacity of an airport land use commission.
Displaced Threshold: A landing threshold that is located at a point on the runway other than the des-
ignated beginning of the runway (see Threshold). (AIM)
Dwelling Unit: Any building, structure or portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or in-
tended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more families, and any vacant land which is offered for
sale or lease for the construction or location thereon of any such building, structure, or portion thereof.
(HUD)
Easement: A less-than-fee-title transfer of real property rights from the property owner to the holder of
the easement.
Equivalent Sound Level (Leq): The level of constant sound that, in the given situation and time period,
has the same average sound energy as does a time-varying sound.
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 14 Part 77 (14CFR77): The part of the Code of Federal
Regulations that deals with objects affecting navigable airspace in the vicinity of airports. Objects that
exceed the Part 77 height limits constitute airspace obstructions. 14CFR77 establishes standards for iden-
tifying obstructions to navigable airspace, sets forth requirements for notice to the FAA of certain pro-
posed construction or alteration, and provides for aeronautical studies of obstructions to determine their
effect on the safe and efficient use of airspace. A copy of the regulations is available at www.ecfr.gov.
Page 383 of 550
GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDIX H
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) H–5
CFR Title 14 Part 77 Surfaces: Imaginary airspace surfaces established with relation to each runway of
an airport. There are five types of surfaces: (1) primary; (2) approach; (3) transitional; (4) horizontal; and
(5) conical.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA): The U.S. government agency that is responsible for ensuring
the safe and efficient use of the nation’s airports and airspace.
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): Regulations formally issued by the FAA to regulate air commerce.
Findings: Legally relevant subconclusions that expose a government agency’s mode of analysis of facts,
regulations, and policies, and that bridge the analytical gap between raw data and ultimate decision.
Fixed Base Operator (FBO): A business that operates at an airport and provides aircraft services to
the general public including, but not limited to, sale of fuel and oil; aircraft sales, rental, maintenance, and
repair; parking and tiedown or storage of aircraft; flight training; air taxi/charter operations; and specialty
services, such as instrument and avionics maintenance, painting, overhaul, aerial application, aerial pho-
tography, aerial hoists, or pipeline patrol.
General Aviation: That portion of civil aviation that encompasses all facets of aviation except air carriers.
(FAA Stats)
Glide Slope: An electronic signal radiated by a component of an ILS to provide vertical g uidance for
aircraft during approach and landing.
Global Positioning System (GPS): A navigational system that utilizes a network of satellites to deter-
mine a positional fix almost anywhere on or above the earth. Developed and operated by the U.S. De-
partment of Defense, GPS has been made available to the civilian sector for surface, marine, and aerial
navigational use. For aviation purposes, the current form of GPS guidance provides en route aerial nav-
igation and selected types of nonprecision instrument approaches. Eventual application of GPS as the
principal system of navigational guidance throughout the world is anticipated.
Helipad: A small, designated area, usually with a prepared surface, on a heliport, airport, landing/takeoff
area, apron/ramp, or movement area used for takeoff, landing, or parking of helicopters. (AIM)
Heliport: A facility used for operating, basing, housing, and maintaining helicopters. (HAI)
Infill: Development that takes place on vacant property largely surrounded by existing development,
especially development that is similar in character.
Instrument Approach Procedure: A series of predetermined maneuvers for the orderly transfer of an
aircraft under instrument flight conditions from the beginning of the initial approach to a landing or to a
point from which a landing may be made visually. It is prescribed and approved for a specific airport by
competent authority (refer to Nonprecision Approach Procedure and Precision Approach Procedure). (AIM)
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR): Rules governing the procedures for conducting instrument flight. Gen-
erally, IFR applies when meteorological conditions with a ceiling below 1,000 feet and visibility less than
3 miles prevail. (AIM)
Instrument Landing System (ILS): A precision instrument approach system that normally consists of
the following electronic components and visual aids: (1) Localizer; (2) Glide Slope; (3) Outer Marker; (4)
Middle Marker; (5) Approach Lights. (AIM)
Page 384 of 550
APPENDIX H GLOSSARY OF TERMS
H–6 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Instrument Operation: An aircraft operation in accordance with an IFR flight plan or an operation
where IFR separation between aircraft is provided by a terminal control facility. (FAA ATA)
Instrument Runway: A runway equipped with electronic and visual navigation aids for which a precision
or nonprecision approach procedure having straight-in landing minimums has been approved. (AIM)
Inverse Condemnation: An action brought by a property owner seeking just compensation for land
taken for a public use against a government or private entity having the power of emine nt domain. It is
a remedy peculiar to the property owner and is exercisable by that party where it appears that the taker
of the property does not intend to bring eminent domain proceedings.
Land Use Density: A measure of the concentration of land use development in an area. Mostly the term
is used with respect to residential development and refers to the number of dwelling units per acre. Unless
otherwise noted, policies in this UKIALUCP refer to gross rather than net acreage.
Land Use Intensity: A measure of the concentration of nonresidential land use development in an area.
For the purposes of airport land use planning, the term indicates the number of people per acre attracted
by the land use. Unless otherwise noted, policies in this UKIALUCP refer to gross rather than net acreage.
Large Airplane: An airplane of more than 12,500 pounds maximum certificated takeoff weight. (Airport
Design AC)
Localizer (LOC): The component of an ILS that provides course guidance to the runway. (AIM)
Mean Sea Level (MSL): An elevation datum given in feet from mean sea level.
Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA): The lowest altitude, expressed in feet above mean sea level, to
which descent is authorized on final approach or during circle-to-land maneuvering in execution of a
standard instrument approach procedure where no electronic glide slope is provided. (FAR 1)
Missed Approach: A maneuver conducted by a pilot when an instrument approach cannot be completed
to a landing. (AIM)
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB): The U.S. government agency responsible for inves-
tigating transportation accidents and incidents.
Navigational Aid (Navaid): Any visual or electronic device airborne or on the surface that provides
point-to-point guidance information or position data to aircraft in flight. (AIM)
Noise Contours: Continuous lines of equal noise level usually drawn around a noise source, such as an
airport or highway. The lines are generally drawn in 5-decibel increments so that they resemble elevation
contours in topographic maps.
Noise Level Reduction (NLR): A measure used to describe the reduction in sound level from envi-
ronmental noise sources occurring between the outside and the inside of a structure.
Nonconforming Use: An existing land use that does not conform to subsequently adopted or amended
zoning or other land use development standards.
Nonprecision Approach Procedure: A standard instrument approach procedure in which no electronic
glide slope is provided. (FAR 1)
Page 385 of 550
GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDIX H
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) H–7
Nonprecision Instrument Runway: A runway with an approved or planned straight-in instrument ap-
proach procedure that has no existing or planned precision instrument approach procedure. (Airport
Design AC)
Obstruction: Any object of natural growth, terrain, or permanent or temporary construction or altera-
tion, including equipment or materials used therein, the height of which exceed the standards established
in Subpart C of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace.
Overflight: Any distinctly visible and/or audible passage of an aircraft in flight, not necessarily directly
overhead.
Overflight Easement: An easement that describes the right to overfly the property above a specified
surface and includes the right to subject the property to noise, vibrations, fumes, and emissions. An
overflight easement is used primarily as a form of buyer notification.
Overflight Zone: The area(s) where aircraft maneuver to enter or leave the traffic pattern, typically de-
fined by the CFR Part 77 horizontal surface.
Overlay Zone: See Combining District.
Planning Area Boundary: An area surrounding an airport designated by an ALUC for the purpose of
airport land use compatibility planning conducted in accordance with provisions of the State Aeronautics
Act.
Precision Approach Procedure: A standard instrument approach procedure where an electronic glide
slope is provided. (FAR 1)
Precision Instrument Runway: A runway with an existing or planned precision instrument approach
procedure. (Airport Design AC)
Referral Area: The area around an airport defined by the planning area boundary adopted by an airport
land use commission within which certain land use proposals are to be referred to the commission for
review.
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ): An area (formerly called a clear zone) off the end of a runway used to
enhance the protection of people and property on the ground. (Airport Design AC)
Safety Zone: For the purpose of airport land use planning, an area near an airport in which land use
restrictions are established to protect the safety of the public from potential aircraft accidents.
Single-Event Noise: As used in herein, the noise from an individual aircraft operation or overflight.
Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL): A measure, in decibels, of the noise exposure level of
a single event, such as an aircraft flyby, measured over the time interval between the initial and final times
for which the noise level of the event exceeds a threshold noise level and normalized to a reference
duration of one second. SENEL is a noise metric established for use in California by the state Airport
Noise Standards and is essentially identical to Sound Exposure Level (SEL).
Site Approval Permit: A written approval issued by the California Department of Transportation au-
thorizing construction of an airport in accordance with approved plans, specifications, and conditions.
Both public-use and special-use airports require a site approval permit. (CCR)
Page 386 of 550
APPENDIX H GLOSSARY OF TERMS
H–8 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
Small Airplane: An airplane of 12,500 pounds or less maximum certificated takeoff weight. (Airport
Design AC)
Sound Exposure Level (SEL): A time-integrated metric (i.e., continuously summed over a time period)
that quantifies the total energy in the A-weighted sound level measured during a transient noise event.
The time period for this measurement is generally taken to be that between the moments when the A-
weighted sound level is 10 dB below the maximum.
Straight-In Instrument Approach: An instrument approach wherein a final approach is begun without
first having executed a procedure turn; it is not necessarily completed with a straight-in landing or made
to straight-in landing weather minimums. (AIM)
Structure: Something that is constructed or erected.
Taking: Government appropriation of private land for which compensation must be paid as required by
the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It is not essential that there be physical seizure or appro-
priation for a taking to occur, only that the government action directly interferes with or substantially
disturbs the owner’s right to use and enjoyment of the property.
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS): Procedures for instrument approach and departure of
aircraft to and from civil and military airports. There are four types of terminal instrument procedures:
precision approach, nonprecision approach, circling, and departure.
Threshold: The beginning of that portion of the runway usable for landing (also see Displaced Threshold).
(AIM)
Touch-and-Go: An operation by an aircraft that lands and departs on a runway without stopping or
exiting the runway. (AIM)
Traffic Pattern: The traffic flow that is prescribed for aircraft landing at, taxiing on, or taking off from
an airport. The components of a typical traffic pattern are upwind leg, crosswind leg, downwind leg, base
leg, and final approach. (AIM)
Visual Approach: An approach where the pilot must use visual reference to the runway for landing
under VFR conditions.
Visual Flight Rules (VFR): Rules that govern the procedures for conducting flight under visual condi-
tions. VFR applies when meteorological conditions are equal to or greater than the specified minimum-
generally, a 1,000-foot ceiling and 3-mile visibility.
Visual Runway: A runway intended solely for the operation of aircraft using visual approach procedures,
with no straight-in instrument approach procedure and no instrument designation indicated on an FAA-
approved airport layout plan. (Airport Design AC)
Zoning: A police power measure, enacted primarily by units of local government, in which the commu-
nity is divided into districts or zones within which permitted and special uses are established, as are reg-
ulations governing lot size, building bulk, placement, and other development standards. Requirements
vary from district to district, but they must be uniform within districts. A zoning ordinance consists of
two parts: the text and a map.
Page 387 of 550
GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDIX H
Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021) H–9
Glossary Sources
CFR 1: Code of Federal Regulations Part 1, Definitions and Abbreviations
AIM: Aeronautical Information Manual
Airport Design AC: Federal Aviation Administration, Airport Design Advisory Circular 150/5300-13
CCR: California Code of Regulations, Title 21, Section 3525 et seq., Division of Aeronautics
FAA ATA: Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Activity
FAA Stats: Federal Aviation Administration, Statistical Handbook of Aviation
HAI: Helicopter Association International
NTSB: National Transportation and Safety Board
Page 388 of 550
APPENDIX H GLOSSARY OF TERMS
H–10 Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (Adopted May 20, 2021)
This page intentionally blank
Page 389 of 550
MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
ATTACHMENTS
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Page 390 of 550
Page 391 of 550
Resolution Number _________
County of Mendocino
Ukiah, California
May 20, 2021
RESOLUTION OF THE MENDOCINO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE
COMMISSION, COUNTY OF MENDOCINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND THE UKIAH
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN.
WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code section 21670(a) requires Airport Land Use
Commissions to prepare Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans for public -use airports to promote
compatibility between airports and the land uses surrounding; and
WHEREAS, the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission adopted the Mendocino
County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (ACLUP) on October 21, 1993 and adopted revisions on
June 6, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission desires to replace the portions
of the ACLUP related to the Ukiah Municipal Airport with a separate and distinct plan, the Ukiah Municipal
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP), located within the City limits of the City of Ukiah, at the
Ukiah Municipal Airport and within the associated Airport Influence Area (AIA) in both the City Limits and
unincorporated areas of Mendocino County (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the draft UKIALUCP were prepared with advice from a technical advis ory group that
included representatives from the City of Ukiah, the County of Mendocino, and the ALUC; and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project and noticed and made available
for agency and public review on July 16, 2020 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, revisions to the Negative Declaration and an Addendum to the UKIALUCP were
prepared in response to comments received during the public review period; and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned revisions to the Negative Declaration do not trigger recirculation
pursuant to section 15073.5 of the CEQA Guidelines as the revisions do not create new avoidable
significant effects; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with applicable provisions of law, the Mendocino County Airport Land
Use Commission held a public hearing on May 20, 2021, at which time the Mendocino County Airport
Land Use Commission heard and received all relevant testimony and evidence presented orally o r in
writing regarding the Negative Declaration and the Project. All interested persons were given an
opportunity to hear and be heard regarding the Negative Declaration and the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission has had an opportunity to
review this Resolution and finds that it accurately sets for th the intentions of the Mendocino County
Airport Land Use Commission regarding the Negative Declaration and the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission
makes the following findings:
1. That the foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.
Page 392 of 550
2. The UKIALUCP was prepared in conformance with the California Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook (October 2011), prepared by the State of California Department of Transportation
Division of Aeronautics, and California Public Utilities Code section 21675.
3. The UKIALUCP has taken into account the features of the Ukiah Municipal Airport development
proposals that have implications for off-airport land uses.
4. The UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature, and neither the project nor their subsequent
implementation by local agencies will lead directly to new development, construction, or to any
physical change to the environment.
5. The UKIALUCP does have the potential to indirectly cause a physical change in the environment
by influencing future land use and development patterns through the establishment of
compatibility guidelines that are intended to prohibit or constrai n certain types of development
within specifically delineated areas. No significant impacts to environmental resources were
identified during the analysis performed for the Initial Study and Negative Declaration.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission hereby
adopts the Negative Declaration. The Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission certifies that the
Negative Declaration has been completed, reviewed, and considered, together with the comments
received during the public review process, in compliance with CEQA and State and County CEQA
Guidelines, finds that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission, and finds that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a significant effect on the environment.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission hereby
adopts the UKIALUCP and associated Addendum and the UKIALUCP replaces the compatibility plan for
Ukiah Municipal Airport adopted by the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission in 1996 , and
hereby directs staff to transmit the UKIALUCP to the California Department of Transportation Division of
Aeronautics.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission
designates the Secretary as the custodian of the document and other material which constitutes the
record of proceedings upon which the decision herein is based. These documents may be found at the
office of the County of Mendocino Planning and Building Services, 860 North Bush Street, Ukiah, CA
95482.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission action
shall be final and immediately effective upon date of adoption.
I hereby certify that according to the Provisions of Government Code Section 25103 delivery of this
document has been made.
ATTEST: JAMES F. FEENAN
Commission Services Supervisor
By:_______________________________
BY: IGNACIO GONZALEZ ERIC CRANE, Chair
Interim Director Mendocino County Airport Land
Use Commission
_______________________________________
Page 393 of 550
Notice of Determination
To: From:
Office of Planning and Research Mendocino County Planning & Building
U.S. Mail: Street Address: 860 North Bush Street
PO Box 3044 1400 Tenth St., Rm 113 Ukiah, CA 95482
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 Sacramento, CA 95812 Contact: Julia Acker Krog
Email: ackerj@mendocinocounty.org
Phone: 707-234-6650
County Clerk: Lead Agency (if different from above):
County of Mendocino ________________________________
501 Low Gap Road Address:_________________________
Ukiah, CA 95482 ________________________________
Contact:_________________________
Phone:__________________________
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public
Resource Code.
State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse): 2020070320
Project Title: Ukiah Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan
Project Applicant: County of Mendocino – Planning and Building Services
Project Location (include county): Within the City limits of the City of Ukiah, at the Ukiah Municipal Airport and
within the associated Airport Influence Area (AIA) in both the City Limits and unincorporated areas of Mendocino
County. APN 003-310-08; Ukiah Municipal Airport located within the City of Ukiah.
Project Description: Adoption of the proposed Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP),
which would supersede sections of the Mendocino County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan pertaining to
the Ukiah Municipal Airport with a separate and distinct plan. The preparation of ALUCPs for public-use airports is
required by the California State Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code Section 21670 et seq.). The purpose of
ALUCPs is to promote compatibility between an airport and the land uses in its vicinity to the extent that these
areas have not already been devoted to incompatible uses.
This is to advise that the County of Mendocino (Lead Agency) has approved the above described project
on May 20, 2021 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project.
1.The project [will will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2.An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
3.Mitigation measures [ were were not] made a condition of the approval of the project.
4.A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan [ was was not] adopted for this project.
5.A statement of Overriding Considerations [ was was not] adopted for this project.
6.Findings [ were were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This is to certify that the project file, which includes the Negative Declaration, record of project approval, and all
supporting materials, is available to the General Public at: Planning and Building Services, 860 N Bush Street,
Ukiah, California 95482.
Signature (Public Agency): Title:
Date: Date Received for filing at OPR:
Assistant Director
May 24, 2021
Page 394 of 550
Page 395 of 550
Page 396 of 550
Page 397 of 550
RREVISED
CEQA
INITIAL STUDY
AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Ukiah Municipal Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan
Prepared for
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission
Prepared by
Mead & Hunt, Inc.
Windsor, California
www.meadhunt.com
May 2020 Draft, Revised January 2021
Attachment 2
Page 398 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
INITIAL STUDY
1. Project Title: Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP)
2. Lead Agency Name and
Address:
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)
860 N. Bush Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
3. Contact Person and
Telephone/Email:
Julia Acker Krog, Assistant Director
County of Mendocino – Planning and Building Services
(707) 234-6650, ackerj@mendocinocounty.org
4. Project Location: Ukiah Municipal Airport, including the City of Ukiah and the
unincorporated area of Mendocino County
(See Exhibits 5 and 6 at the end of this document)
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and
Address:
Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission
860 N. Bush Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
6. General Plan Designation(s): Various. City: Residential, Commercial, Manufacturing, Downtown Core;
County: Commercial, Industrial, Agricultural, Suburban Residential
7. Zoning Designation(s): Various: Residential of varying densities, Manufacturing & Industrial,
Agricultural
8. Description of Proposed Project:
The creation of airport land use commissions and preparation of airport land use compatibility plans are requirements
of the California State Aeronautics Act, Article 3.5, Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21670 et seq. As expressed by
state law, the purpose of an airport land use commission is to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring
the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to
excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public and military airports to the extent that these areas are
not already devoted to incompatible uses. An airport land use commission achieves this goal by adopting an airport
land use compatibility plan for each public-use airport within the County.
The Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC or ‘the Commission’) is established pursuant to California
PUC Section 21670.4. The ALUC consists of seven members, two of which are required to have aviation expertise:
x Three members appointed by the County Board of Supervisors from the County Planning Commission,
x Three members appointed by the City Selection Committee of mayors of the county’s cities,
x One member at large appointed by the other six members of the Commission.
Page 399 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
The Mendocino County ALUC is responsible for preparing and adopting an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(ALUCP) for each public-use airport it oversees: Boonville, Ells Field, Little River, Ocean Ridge, Round Valley, and Ukiah
Municipal airports.
In 2019, the City of Ukiah (the City), as the owner and operator of the Ukiah Municipal Airport (the Airport),
requested that the Mendocino County ALUC update the Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
(UKIALUCP). The need for updating the ALUCP for Ukiah Municipal Airport is due to local and state level changes that
have occurred since the plan was adopted in 1996. First, the countywide Mendocino County Airport Comprehensive
Land Use Plan (MCACLUP) predates the latest guidance provided by the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans), Division of Aeronautics in the 2011 California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook). Second,
the current MCACLUP was based on the development proposals provided in the 1996 Ukiah Municipal Airport Master
Plan, a plan which no longer fully reflects the city’s planning for the Airport. In 2015, the City initiated a planning
effort to update the Airport Layout Plan (ALP). The updated ALP was approved in 2016 by the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and reflects a future 465-foot northerly extension to Runway 15-33 for an ultimate runway
length of 4,888 feet. However, the additional length would not be available for aircraft landing from the north;
instead, pilots would continue to land at the existing Runway 15 landing threshold. In accordance with state law (PUC
Section 21675(a)), Caltrans Division of Aeronautics accepted the ALP in May 2019 as the basis of this proposed
UKIALUCP.
In November 2020, the Ukiah City Council approved a recommendation to the Mendocino County ALUC that the
UKIALUCP update protect for a future 5,000-foot runway to accommodate future operations by CalFire Lockheed
C-130 fire attack aircraft. At its meeting on November 19, 2020, the Mendocino County ALUC directed ALUC staff to
revise the proposed UKIALUCP (Public Draft July 2020) and associated environmental document as recommended by
the Ukiah City Council. The proposed revision to the draft UKIALUCP includes the addition of a Compatibility Zone 1*
beyond Zone 1 at each end of the runway (Runway 15/33). Inclusion of a Zone 1* at both runway ends rather than
just one preserves the option for the additional runway length to be provided on either the north or the south. Each
Zone 1* encompasses the outer 112 feet of the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) associated with a 5,000-foot runway
length extended in one direction or the other. The compatibility criteria for Zone 1* match those of Zone A* in the
1996 MCACLUP for Ukiah Municipal Airport and is less restrictive than the criteria for Zone 1. Where Zone 1 precludes
all future structures that are not aeronautical in function, Zone 1* allows very low intensity outdoor uses such as auto
parking and storage with a maximum intensity of 10 people per acre.
The proposed UKIALUCP (the Project), including Addendum #1 with the proposed revisions to the draft UKIALUCP, is
the focus of this Initial Study. The proposed UKIALUCP would replace the portions of the existing countywide current
MCACLUP pertaining to the Ukiah Municipal Airport, which was adopted by the Mendocino County ALUC on October
21, 1993, and last revised on June 6, 1996. The current MCACLUP would remain in effect for the other airports in
Mendocino County. A copy of the proposed UKIALUCP is presented as Attachment A and Addendum #1 with the
proposed revisions to the draft UKIALUCP is presented in Attachment B to this Initial Study. The applicable sections of
the proposed UKIALUCP include the policy chapters (Chapters 2 and 3) and the background chapter (Chapter 4).
Page 400 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
Consistent with PUC Section 21674.7, preparation of the proposed UKIALUCP was guided by the information included
in the Handbook. For example, the Handbook provides a set of generic safety zones that are based on nationwide
aircraft accident location data. The safety zones divide an airport vicinity into as many as six safety zones, each
representing a distinct level of risk:
x Safety Zone 1 and Zone 1*: Runway protection zone
x Safety Zone 2: Inner approach/departure zone
x Safety Zone 3: Inner turning zone
x Safety Zone 4: Outer approach/departure zone
x Safety Zone 5: Sideline zone
x Safety Zone 6: Traffic pattern zone
The proposed UKIALUCP applies the generic Handbook safety zones for a medium general aviation runway (length
4,000 feet to 5,999 feet) to the existing (4,423-foot) and future (4,888-foot) Runway 15/33 configurations. As
described below, the Handbook safety zones are further refined to reflect the unique aeronautical factors at the
Ukiah Municipal Airport. The adjusted safety zones establish the Compatibility Zones for the proposed UKIALUCP. The
proposed UKIALUCP also considers the residential densities (dwelling units per acre) and non-residential intensities
(people per acre) provided by the Handbook for each safety zone.
The proposed ALUCP for Ukiah Municipal Airport also reflects the anticipated growth of the Airport for the next 20
years as required by PUC Section 21675(a). The proposed UKIALUCP is based on the 2016 FAA-approved ALP showing
a future 465-foot northerly runway extension and Airport noise contours reflect an ultimate aircraft activity forecast
level of 30,916 annual operations.
Lastly, PUC Section 21675(c) requires an ALUC to consult with the involved agencies regarding establishment of the
Airport Influence Area boundary. The proposed UKIALUCP was developed in coordination with the ALUC and its staff
as well as the planning and airport staff members from the County of Mendocino and City of Ukiah.
Function of the ALUCP
The function of the proposed UKIALUCP is to promote compatibility between the Airport and the land uses in its
vicinity to the extent that these areas have not already been devoted to incompatible uses. The plan accomplishes
this function through establishment of a set of compatibility criteria applicable to new development around the
Airport. Additionally, the proposed UKIALUCP serves as a tool for use by the ALUC in fulfilling its statutory duty to
review plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies and the Airport operator for consistency with the
proposed UKIALUCP criteria.
Neither the proposed UKIALUCP nor the ALUC have authority over existing land uses or over the operation of the
Airport. Additionally, the ALUC has no authority over federal, state, or tribal lands. Except in Zone 1, the proposed
UKIALUCP also would not prohibit the construction of a single-family home (or secondary dwellings allowed by state
law) on a legal lot of record if the use is permitted by local land use regulations.
Page 401 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
The County of Mendocino and City of Ukiah have land use authority over the areas within the proposed Airport
Influence Area and are expected to incorporate certain criteria and procedural policies from the proposed UKIALUCP
into their respective general plans and zoning ordinances to ensure that future land use development will be
compatible with the long-term operation of the Ukiah Municipal Airport. These local affected agencies also have the
option of overruling the ALUC in accordance with the steps defined by state law (PUC Section 21676, 21676.5, or
21677).
Geographic Scope
The proposed UKIALUCP defines the Airport Influence Area as lands on which the uses could be negatively affected by
current or future aircraft operations at the Airport as well as lands on which the uses could negatively affect Airport
usage and thus necessitate restriction on those uses. The proposed Airport Influence Area for Ukiah Municipal Airport
extends approximately 3.0 miles (16,000 feet) from the ends of the Airport’s runway. The proposed Airport Influence
Area encompasses land within the City of Ukiah and unincorporated areas of Mendocino County.
The Airport Influence Area for the proposed UKIALUCP considers the geographic extents of four types of compatibility
concerns:
x Noise: Locations exposed to potentially disruptive levels of aircraft noise.
x Safety: Areas where the risk of an aircraft accident poses heightened safety concerns for people and property
on the ground.
x Airspace Protection: Places where height and various other land use characteristics need to be restricted in
order to prevent creation of physical, visual, or electronic hazards to flight within the airspace required for
operation of aircraft to and from the Airport.
Exhibit 1 (revised January 2021) located at the end of this document depicts the Airport Influence Area and
Compatibility Zones for the proposed UKIALUCP. The proposed Airport Influence Area and Compatibility Zone
boundaries consider the following compatibility factors:
x Noise – Future noise contours reflecting an ultimate aircraft activity forecast level of 30,916 annual
operations. The Compatibility Zones also consider the CalFire noise contours representing a typical fire event
day with 44 departures and 44 arrivals split evenly between Runways 15 and 33. Aircraft type modeled is the
Grumman S-2 Tracker (S-2T).
o Safety – Generic safety zones provided in the 2011 Handbook are applied to the existing and future
runway configurations in the manner listed below. The adjusted safety zones define Compatibility Zones
1 through 6 for the proposed UKIALUCP.Runway 15/33: Safety zones for a medium general aviation
runway (length 4,000 feet to 5,999 feet) are applied to the existing (4,423-foot) and future (4,888-foot)
runway configurations.
o Runway Protection Zone (RPZ): Safety Zone 1 is based on the existing and future RPZs reflected in the
2016 ALP. Safety Zone 1* beyond each runway end encompasses the outer 112 feet of the RPZ
associated with a 5,000-foot runway length extended either to the north or south.
Page 402 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 5
o North Side Traffic Pattern: Although a future northerly extension of Runway 15 is proposed in the 2016
ALP, the landing threshold will be conterminous with the existing runway end. As such, Zone 2 is based
on the existing runway configuration. Zone 4 is enlarged to include the northly portion of Zone 2 for the
future runway configuration.
o East Side Traffic Pattern: Consistent with state guidance, safety zones on the west side of the Airport
have been adjusted to reflect the Airport’s single-sided traffic pattern on the east side of the Airport,
which is necessitated by high terrain located to the west. Accordingly, Zone 3 is truncated, and Zone 6 is
omitted.
o Southern Traffic Pattern: Safety zones south of the approach end of Runway 33 are angled 5 degrees to
the east to reflect the common practice used by pilots whereby flight routes align with Highway 101
when departing to the south or on approach to Runway 33.
x Overflight – Primary traffic patterns reflecting where aircraft operating at the Airport routinely fly.
x Airspace Protection – Outer boundary of the Obstruction Surfaces as defined by Code of Federal Regulation
(CFR) Part 77, Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace. Surfaces associated with both
the existing and future runway configurations are depicted. The Outer Conical Surface defines the Airport
Influence Area for the proposed UKIALUCP. Exhibit 2 defines the Airport Protection Surfaces for the Ukiah
Municipal Airport.
Exhibits 1 (revised January 2021) and 2, which present the policy maps for the proposed UKIALUCP, define the areas
subject to the proposed UKIALUCP policies and criteria. The proposed Airport Influence Area constitutes the Referral
Area within which certain land use actions and Airport actions are subject to ALUC review for a consistency
determination with the proposed UKIALUCP. The proposed Compatibility Zones define the areas within which land
use restrictions may be necessary to maintain airport land use compatibility.
Exhibit 3 compares the Airport Influence Area and Compatibility Zones in the current MCACLUP with those of the
proposed UKIALUCP. Exhibits 5 and 6 depict the proposed compatibility zones with the City’s and County’s land use
designations. Exhibits 3 through 6 also identify the areas that would experience increased restrictions under the
proposed UKIALUCP compared to the current MCACLUP. Exhibit 4 provides details as to the type of restriction that
would apply (density or intensity restrictions).
As shown in Exhibit 3, the principal difference between the current MCACLUP and proposed UKIALUCP is that the
zone boundaries in the current MCACLUP do not consider the Airport’s future runway length of 4,888 feet (reflecting
a 465-foot northerly runway extension). The current MCACLUP also follows geographic features, such as road and
parcel lines, while the proposed UKIALUCP boundaries follow the adjusted Handbook Safety Zones. Other notable
differences include:
x Zone 1 (north) – Modified to reflect the existing and future Runway Protection Zone specified by the FAA-
approved ALP.
x Zones 3 and 6 (west) – Truncated on west side to reflect one-sided traffic pattern on the east side of the
Airport due to high terrain to the west.
Page 403 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 6
x Zones 2 through 4 (south) – Angled 5-degrees to the east as noted above.
x Zones 3 and 4 (north, City) – The Handbook recommends that compatibility criteria provide for maintaining
residential densities of the underlying zoning in urban environments. As such, an Urban Overlay is established
in Zones 3 and 4 north of the Airport to reflect the existing urbanized land use patterns in the City’s
downtown area. The Urban Overlay allows residential densities of up to 15 units per acre in Zone 3 and 35
units per acre in Zone 4.
x Zone 3 (southwest, County) – Includes an Urban Overlay in Zone 3 southwest of the Airport in
unincorporated Mendocino County to reflect an existing (grandfathered) land use agreement allowing
medium-density residential uses. The Urban Overlay allows residential densities of up to 15 units per acre in
Zone 3.
Exhibits 7A through 7D identify the seven parcels that fall within the new proposed Zone 1* under the revised
UKIALUCP (Final Draft January 2021). Under the draft UKIALUCP (Public Draft July 2020), portions of these parcels
could be developed under Zone 2 criteria. Under the revised UKIALUCP (Final Draft January 2021), some or all the
Zone 2 development potential is removed as these areas would become part of the more restrictive Compatibility
Zone 1*. However, the criteria proposed for Zone 1* are identical to those that apply to this area under the currently
adopted MCACLUP (1996).
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Ukiah Municipal Airport is owned and operated by the City of Ukiah and is located within the southern part of the city
limits approximately 0.3 mile west of State Highway 101. Ukiah is situated within the southeastern corner of
Mendocino County and is surrounded by hills to the west and south, Lake Mendocino to the northeast, and the
Mayacamas Mountains to the east.
Land uses near the Airport are low-to-moderate-density urban to the north and west as well as immediately to the
east between the Airport and highway. The city center is located to the north of the Airport. The areas south and east
are mostly in unincorporated Mendocino County and dedicated to agriculture and commercial development. The
City’s sphere of influence shows future annexation to the north and west.
Exhibits 5 and 6 depict the County and City land use designations within the Airport Influence Area and provide an
aerial basemap to reflect existing land uses.
10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
Although input from various entities is necessary, the ALUC can adopt the proposed UKIALUCP without formal
approval from any other state or local agency. However, a copy of the plan must be submitted to the Caltrans Division
of Aeronautics (PUC Section 21675(d)). The Caltrans Division of Aeronautics is required by state law (PUC Section
21675(e)) to assess whether the plan addresses the matters that must be included pursuant to the statutes and to
notify the ALUC of any deficiencies. The statute also requires the ALUC to establish (or revise) the Airport Influence
Area boundary only after “hearing and consultation with involved agencies” (PUC Section 21675(c)).
Page 404 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 7
The proposed UKIALUCP policies can be implemented only by the local jurisdictions that have authority over land use
within the Airport Influence Area, which are the County of Mendocino and the City of Ukiah in this case. State
statutes require an agency to make its general plan consistent with an ALUCP within 180 days of ALUC adoption or to
overrule the ALUC (Government Code Section 65302.3). If a jurisdiction chooses to overrule an ALUCP, the overrule
procedure requires formal findings that the jurisdiction’s action is consistent with the intent of the state airport land
use compatibility planning statutes and action by a two-thirds vote of the jurisdiction’s governing body (PUC Section
21676).
11. Summary of Potential Environmental Effects
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the purpose of this Initial Study is to inform decision
makers and the public about the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project—the adoption and
subsequent implementation of the proposed UKIALUCP—and to reduce those environmental impacts to the extent
feasible. The outcome of the Initial Study is to determine what type of environmental document—a Negative
Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report—is required of the proposed Project.
For the purposes of this Initial Study, the following projects are considered:
x Proposed Project – Adoption of the proposed UKIALUCP with the Urban Overlay and Zone 1*,
x Project Alternative – Adoption of the proposed UKIALUCP without the Urban Overlay or Zone 1*,
x No Project Alternative – Retainment of the current MCACLUP (i.e., proposed UKIALUCP is not adopted).
The proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature (PUC Section 21674, 21675, and 21675.1), and neither the project—
the adoption of the proposed UKIALUCP—nor its subsequent implementation by local agencies will lead to any new
development, construction, or any physical change to existing land uses or the environment.
The proposed UKIALUCP does not prohibit future development in the vicinity of the Airport but rather would affect
where and what type of development could occur within the Airport Influence Area. The proposed UKIALUCP seeks to
guide the compatibility of future land uses by limiting the density, intensity, height, and other features of new uses to
avoid potential conflicts with Airport operations and to preserve the safety of those living and working around the
Airport as well as of those in flight. Therefore, the proposed UKIALUCP may indirectly influence future land use
development patterns near the Airport by enabling development in some locations (to the extent that such
development is consistent with local agency general plans) and constraining development in other locations.
Any indirect effect that may arise from shifts in future development patterns is uncertain because potential shifts
cannot be accurately predicted as to when, where, or to what extent the development may occur. The environmental
impacts of such shifts or “displacement” are speculative and, therefore, are reasonably considered to be less than
significant for purposes of this CEQA analysis (Title 14. California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Article 10, §15145).
This finding of less than significant is further supported by the fact that state law (Government Code 65302.3)
requires a local agency to amend its general plan and any applicable specific plan to be consistent with the ALUCP.
Therefore, any conflicts identified in the Initial Study would be alleviated by the local agency amending the applicable
plan to be consistent with the ALUCP or, alternatively, overruling the ALUC by adopting findings pursuant to PUC
Section 21676. These actions are the responsibility and purview of the local agency, not the ALUC.
Page 405 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 8
The need to analyze displacement as part of the environmental impact analysis for adoption of an ALUCP stems from
a 2007 California State Supreme Court Case, Muzzy Ranch Co. v. Solano County Airport Land Use Commission.1
Among other things, in its decision in that case the court found that “…placing a ban on development in one area of a
jurisdiction may have the consequence, notwithstanding existing zoning or land use planning, of displacing
development to other areas of the jurisdiction.” While an ALUCP does not and need not determine where the
displaced development would move to—and, indeed, ALUCs have no authority by which to make such a decision—
the extent of the conflict that results in the displacement must be analyzed.
Although policies in the proposed UKIALUCP would influence future land use development patterns within the Airport
Influence Area, the proposed UKIALUCP would not increase levels of development above those projected within the
general plans adopted by the affected local agencies. The environmental effects of development proposed in the
adopted general plans have already been adequately analyzed in previously certified environmental documentation
and policies and/or mitigation measures have been adopted that would reduce those environmental effects.
Additionally, any future development proposals would be subject to CEQA, ensuring that potential impacts are
studied, disclosed, and mitigated, as appropriate.
For the reasons stated above, the proposed UKIALUCP would not result in any direct impacts to the following
environmental categories: Aesthetics; Agriculture/Forestry Resources; Air Quality; Biological Resources; Cultural
Resources; Geology/Soils; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Hazards/Hazardous Materials; Hydrology/Water Quality;
Mineral Resources; Noise; Recreation; Transportation/Traffic; and Utilities/Services Systems.
No environmental categories would be affected by this project to the extent of having a “Potentially Significant
Impact.” Four environmental impact categories, Biological Resources, Land Use and Planning, Population and
Housing, and Public Services, are identified as having a “Less than Significant Impact.” Appropriate discussions are
provided for other impact categories that warrant explanation.
As described in Section 4, Biological Resources, the Airport Influence Area for Ukiah Municipal Airport is within the
Mendocino Redwood Company Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). An NCCP identifies and provides for
the regional protection of plants, animals, and their habitats while allowing compatible and appropriate economic
activity. Working with landowners, environmental organizations, and other interested parties, a local agency oversees
the numerous activities that compose the development of an NCCP. CDFW and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
provide the necessary support, direction, and guidance to NCCP participants.2 The NCCP does not propose new or
enhancement of existing wildlife habitat within the Airport Influence Area established by the proposed UKIALUCP. A
biological resource assessment will be conducted for proposed development projects where there may be a special-
status species or critical habitat on the project site. The proposed UKIALUCP does not grant development rights like a
local agency’s general plan or zoning. Therefore, no conflicts exist between the NCCP and proposed UKIALUCP.
As described in Section 10, the general plan policies and land use maps for the County of Mendocino and the City of
Ukiah were reviewed for consistency with the proposed UKIALUCP; while no direct conflicts exist between the general
1 Muzzy Ranch Co. v. Solano County Airport Land Use Commission (2007) 41 Cal.4th 372.
2 Source: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/NCCP.
Page 406 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 9
plan policies and the proposed UKIALUCP policies, the County and City will each be required to update the
compatibility information contained in its respective land use plans to reflect the proposed UKIALUCP. The analysis
also determined that several general plan land use designations shown in the local agencies’ zoning maps directly
conflict with the proposed UKIALUCP density criteria (see Exhibits 4, 5, 6, and 8). Based on these findings, the County
and City will be required to make minor changes to their respective general plan, specific plans, and/or implementing
ordinances to be fully consistent with the proposed UKIALUCP or to take action to overrule the ALUC.
As described in Section 14, a housing displacement analysis was conducted to determine if the County and City could
satisfy their shares of the regional housing needs if the proposed UKIALUCP restricted future residential development
within portions of the Airport Influence Area. The analysis found that while there was a potential for displacing future
housing units within potions of the Airport Influence Area, the displacement of future housing was deemed to be less
than significant because the amount of displacement was negligible, the housing units could be accommodated in
other areas of the Airport Influence Area and the County and City could fulfill their obligations associated with the
Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
As described in Section 15, Public Services, adoption and implementation of the proposed UKIALUCP would create a
temporary increase in the staff workloads of the affected local agencies as a result of the state requirement to modify
local general plans for consistency with the ALUCP. However, this effect would be temporary. Over the long term, the
procedural policies included in the proposed UKIALUCP are intended to simplify and clarify the ALUC project review
process and thus reduce workloads for the Mendocino County ALUC and local agency planning staff members.
12. Consultation with California Native American Tribes
The authority of the ALUC does not extend to state, federal, or tribal lands. Lands controlled (i.e., owned, leased, or in
trust) by federal or state agencies or by Native American tribes are not subject to the provisions of the state ALUC
statues or the proposed UKIALUCP. The project does not propose any new development, construction, or physical
change to the environment; therefore, there will be no disturbance of land or culturally significant resources. No
tribal consultation is required for this project.
Page 407 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
REFERENCES
The following references are cited in the text that follows for the Initial Study.
1. Association of Environmental Professionals. 2020 CEQA California Environmental Quality Act Statues and
Guidelines, Appendix G: Environmental Checklist Form. January 1, 2019.
2. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. NCCP Plan Summary – Mendocino Redwood Company NCCP/HCP.
Amended July 31, 2017.
3. City of Ukiah. Housing Element Update 2019-2027. October 2019.
4. City of Ukiah. Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan Report. July 1996.
5. City of Ukiah. Ukiah Municipal Airport Layout Plan (ALP). January 2016.
6. City of Ukiah. Ukiah General Plan. December 6, 1995.
7. City of Ukiah. Ukiah General Plan Map. December 16, 2004.
8. City of Ukiah. City of Ukiah Zoning Map. February 2017.
9. City of Ukiah. Ukiah Compatibility Zoning Map. July 1996.
10. County of Mendocino. Mendocino Zoning Display Map. December 5, 2018.
11. County of Mendocino. Regional Housing Needs Plan. August 2019.
12. County of Mendocino. Ukiah Valley Area Plan. August 2011.
13. Federal Aviation Administration. Airport Master Record (Form 5010). March 2019.
14. Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission. Mendocino County Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Adopted October 21, 1993 and last amended on June 6, 1996.
15. State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Division of Aeronautics. California Airport Land Use
Planning Handbook. October 2011.
Page 408 of 550
Page 409 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
ANALYSIS SUMMARY (See individual pages for details, Pg #s revised January 2021)
Potentially Significant Impact
Less than Significant Impact with Project Mitigation
Less than Significant Impact
CATEGORY Pg No Impact
Comments
(Also see discussion above starting on page 7, Topic 11)
1. AESTHETICS 14 No direct or indirect impacts to aesthetic resources.
2. AGRICULTURE/FORESTRY
RESOURCES 15
No direct or indirect impacts to agricultural or forestry uses within the
AIA or result in conversion to other uses.
3. AIR QUALITY 16 No direct or indirect impacts to air quality.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 17
f) Airport is within the Mendocino Redwood Company Natural
Community Conservation Plan Area
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES 19 No direct or indirect impacts to cultural impacts.
6. ENERGY 20 No direct or indirect impacts to energy resources.
7. GEOLOGY/SOILS 21 No direct or indirect impacts to geology, soils, or seismicity.
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 22 No direct or indirect impacts to greenhouse gas emissions.
9. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS 23
ALUCP limits exposure of people to aircraft accident hazards by
restricting risk-sensitive uses in airport vicinity and limits the storage of
hazardous materials.
10. HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY 25 No direct or indirect impacts to hydrology and water quality.
11. LAND USE/PLANNING 26 Minor modifications needed to local Land Use Plans
12. MINERAL RESOURCES 33 No direct or indirect impacts to mineral resources.
Page 410 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
13. NOISE 34
ALUCP limits exposure of people to noise but does not regulate aircraft
operations
14. POPULATION/HOUSING 36 Potential exists for displacement of housing units
15. PUBLIC SERVICES 40
Negligible effect on special districts, school districts, and community
college districts as well as government staff workloads
16. RECREATION 41 No direct or indirect impacts to recreation.
17. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC 42
No direct or indirect impacts to on-ground transportation and traffic.
Adoption and implementation of proposed UKIALUCP will not result in
changes to air traffic patterns.
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES 43 No direct or indirect impacts to tribal cultural resources.
19. UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS 44 No direct or indirect impacts to utilities and service systems.
20. WILDFIRE 45
No direct or indirect impairment to an adopted emergency response or
evacuation plan, exacerbation of wildfire risks, or exposing of people or
structures to significant risks.
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE 46 No cumulative impacts
Page 411 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
1. Aesthetics
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099.
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced
from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in
an urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the
area?
Discussion
a - d): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The Mendocino County General Plan and
the City of Ukiah General Plan indicate that Mendocino County encompasses an outstanding variety of natural vistas,
landscapes, water resources, and Scenic Byways. Although the Plans provide lists and maps of known scenic
resources, the Plans indicate that the policies and actions pertain to all scenic resources, not just those that are listed
and mapped. No mapped resources are contained within the proposed Airport Influence Area for Ukiah Municipal
Airport. The proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature; it does not propose any new development, construction, or
physical change to the environment that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to aesthetic resources.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 412 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may
refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept.
of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining
whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may
refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment
project, and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air
Resources Board.
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest
land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section
12220(g)), timberland (as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land
to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
Discussion
a - e): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The Mendocino County General Plan and
the City of Ukiah General Plan indicates that the eastern portions of the proposed Airport Influence Area include
prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance. ALUCP Policy 3.1.4, Land Use Conversion, encourages
preservation of existing agricultural and open spaces. Additionally, the proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory. It does not
provide for any physical change to the environment that would directly or indirectly conflict with agricultural or
forestry use within the proposed Airport Influence Area or result in their conversion to other uses.
Page 413 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
Mitigation
None required.
Page 414 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
3. Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
Discussion
a - d): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). Mendocino County lies within the North
Coast Air Basin and air quality is locally regulated by the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District. Both the
Mendocino County General Plan and City of Ukiah General Plan include policies ensuring that development proposals
adhere to federal, state, and district requirements. Although the proposed Airport Influence Area has the potential to
contain a wide variety of sensitive receptors, both known and unknown, the proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in
nature. Therefore, it does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the environment
that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to air quality.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 415 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
4. Biological Resources
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Discussion
a - e): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The Mendocino County General Plan and
City of Ukiah General Plan indicate known locations of special status species (plant and animal) and sensitive habitats
within the proposed Airport Influence Area. Therefore, the proposed Airport Influence Area has the potential to
contain a wide variety of biological resources, both known and unknown. The proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in
nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the environment that would
directly or indirectly result in any impacts to biological resources.
f): The proposed Airport Influence Area encompasses lands within the Airport and is within the Mendocino Redwood
Company Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). This plan, which is being coordinated by the Mendocino
Page 416 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 1
Redwood Company, identifies and provides for the regional protection of plants, animals, and their habitats while
allowing compatible and appropriate economic activity. Working with landowners, environmental organizations, and
other interested parties, a local agency oversees the numerous activities that compose the development of an NCCP.
CDFW and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provide the necessary support, direction, and guidance to NCCP
participants.
The proposed UKIALUCP would prohibit creating or enhancing existing wildlife habitat areas within the proposed
Airport Influence Area if the habitat would attract hazardous wildlife to the Airport environs (e.g., birds). This
proposed UKIALUCP prohibition could potentially conflict with the NCCP objectives. For example, under the proposed
UKIALUCP, new development projects proposed within the Airport Influence Area would be precluded from providing
“on-site” restoration of habitat areas. However, the proposed UKIALUCP would allow new development projects to
mitigate their impacts through off-site habitat restoration, clustering development, and/or project design. The
proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical
change to the environment that would directly conflict with the provisions of the NCCP. Additionally, potential
indirect conflicts are deemed to be less than significant as the proposed UKIALUCP would enable achievement of the
NCCP objectives of protecting natural resources in areas outside of the Airport Influence Area.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 417 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
5. Cultural Resources
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion
a - c): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). Cultural resources in Mendocino County
include archaeological resources, historic resources, and cultural resources related to Native Americans. The
proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical
change to the environment that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to cultural resources.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 418 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
6. Energy
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due
to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources during project construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
Discussion
a - b): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). Renewable energy plants are
incompatible in Zones 1 through 3 but are conditionally compatible in Zones 4 through 6 if the site outside the zone
would not serve intended public function. All facilities and associated power lines must meet airspace protection
criteria (i.e. height, thermal plumes, glare, etc.). The proposed UKIALUCP establishes restrictions and FAA notification
requirements of proposed objects and height limits of objects near airports. Boundaries of the FAA notification area
for the Airport are depicted on Exhibit 2, Airspace Protection Zone. Wind energy systems are not compatible in the
vicinity of an airport if they are prohibited by a comprehensive land use plan or any implementing regulations
adopted by the ALUC. The proposed UKIALUCP provides guidance on risk-sensitive uses (uses that potentially pose
safety concerns regardless of the number of people present, hazardous materials, and community critical
infrastructure) that could have a community-wide impact.
The proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical
change to the environment that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to energy resources.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 419 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
7. Geology and Soils
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
(Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of
the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Discussion
a - f): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The proposed Airport Influence Area has
the potential to contain a wide variety of geology, soils, or seismicity, both known and unknown. However, the
proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical
change to the environment that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to geology, soils, or seismicity.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 420 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
Discussion
a - b): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The Mendocino County General Plan and
City of Ukiah General Plan includes policies addressing atmosphere and climate change. The Mendocino County
General Plan and City of Ukiah General Plan indicate that the City maintains a Climate Action Plan that identifies
programs and actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to meet the Council’s greenhouse gas reduction goal.
Nevertheless, the proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development,
construction, or physical change to the environment that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to
greenhouse gas emissions.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 421 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section §65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Discussion
a – d, f – g): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The proposed UKIALUCP includes
land use compatibility policies that prohibit or restrict land uses that manufacture, process and/or store bulk
quantities of hazardous materials within the proposed Airport Influence Area. Nevertheless, the proposed UKIALUCP
is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the
environment that would directly or indirectly result in creating a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
Page 422 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
e): Pursuant to the State Aeronautics Act, the purpose of the proposed UKIALUCP is to minimize the public’s exposure
to excessive noise and safety hazards within the Airport vicinity. Therefore, adoption and implementation of the
proposed UKIALUCP would have a beneficial impact by restricting development that would expose people within the
Airport Influence Area to Airport-related safety hazards including aircraft accidents.
The proposed UKIALUCP uses the aircraft accident risk data and safety compatibility concepts provided in the
California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Caltrans, 2011) to establish Airport land use compatibility zones to
include areas exposed to significant safety hazards. The proposed UKIALUCP also establishes safety criteria and
policies that limit concentrations of people within the compatibility zones. The purpose of the policies is to minimize
the risks and potential consequences associated with an off-Airport aircraft accident or emergency landing. The
policies consider the risks both to people and property in the vicinity of the Airport and to people on board the
aircraft.
The risks of an aircraft accident occurrence are further reduced by airspace protection policies that limit the height of
structures, trees, and other objects that might penetrate the Airport’s airspace as defined by Federal Aviation
Regulations (FAR), Part 77, Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace. The airspace protection
policies also restrict land use features that may generate other hazards to flight such as visual hazards (i.e., smoke,
dust, steam, etc.), electronic hazards that may disrupt aircraft communications or navigation, and wildlife hazards
(i.e., uses which would attract hazardous wildlife to Airport environs). Therefore, no impact is anticipated as a result
of the adoption and implementation of the proposed UKIALUCP.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 423 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
10. Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the proposed project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or
groundwater quality?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner that would:
i) result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site;
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff
in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
j) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
k) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable ground water management plan?
Discussion
a - k): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The Mendocino County General Plan and
City of Ukiah General Plan include policies aimed at protecting the quantity and quality of water for public health and
aquatic life. The most critical surface water quality problem in Mendocino County is sedimentation—the carrying of
dust and soils into bodies of water. Major sources of sediment include erosion from barren or poorly vegetated soils,
erosion from the toes of slides along stream channels, and sediments from roads. Goals RM-2 and RM-3 of the
County’s General Plan seek to protect and enhance water resources and quality. At the same time, Policies RM-
19:RM-23 speak to the County’s Water Quality policies, some of which overlap with the City of Ukiah especially as it
concerns the integration of storm water best management practices. Nevertheless, the proposed UKIALUCP is
regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the environment
that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to hydrology and water quality.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 424 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
11. Land Use and Planning
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict
with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
Discussion
a): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The proposed ALUCP is regulatory in nature;
it does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the environment that would directly or
indirectly result in physically dividing an established community.
State law (Government Code Section 65302.3) requires each local agency having jurisdiction over land uses within an
ALUC’s planning area, also referred to as the Airport Influence Area, to modify its general plan and any affected
specific plans to be consistent with the ALUCP. The law says that the local agency must take this action within 180
days of ALUCP adoption or amendment. The only other course of action available to local agencies is to overrule the
ALUC by, among other things, a two-thirds vote of its governing body after making findings that the agency’s plans are
consistent with the intent of state airport land use planning statutes (PUC Section 21676(b)). A general plan does not
need to be identical with an ALUCP in order to be consistent with it. To meet the consistency test, a general plan must
do two things:
1. It must specifically address compatibility planning issues, either directly or through reference to a zoning
ordinance or other policy document; and
2. It must avoid direct conflicts with compatibility planning criteria.
With regard to the proposed UKIALUCP, the County of Mendocino and the City of Ukiah are the only two general
purpose government entities having land use jurisdiction in the proposed Ukiah Municipal Airport Influence Area. As
such, once the proposed UKIALUCP is adopted by the ALUC, these agencies will be required to amend their general
plans and/or implementing ordinances to be consistent with the proposed UKIALUCP or to take action to overrule the
ALUC.
The general plan consistency review detailed below focuses on two types of inconsistencies:
1. Adopted general plan policies pertaining to airport land use compatibility planning that either directly conflict
or need to be amended to reflect changes in the proposed UKIALUCP policies and maps; and
2. Land use designations provided in the adopted general plan land use map or zoning map that may conflict
with the proposed UKIALUCP criteria.
Page 425 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
General Plan Policies
The Mendocino County General Plan includes policies addressing airport land use compatibility. The policies direct the
County to consider and be consistent with the 1996 MCACLUP when making General Plan and Zoning decisions. The
County also implements an Airport Compatibility Overlay Zone that identifies land within unincorporated Mendocino
County where additional requirements apply to ensure compatibility of land uses and development with nearby
airport operations. The Airport Compatibility Overlay Zone coincides with the Airport Influence Area designated by
the Mendocino County ALUC in its 1996 MCACLUP.
The Ukiah General Plan includes policies and actions pertaining to airport land use compatibility. The policies in the
Land Use element call for establishing airport overlay zoning districts that closely mirror the safety, noise, and
compatibility standards in the 1996 MCACLUP as a means of reducing land use conflicts near the airport. The City’s
zoning code establishes two airport-overlay zoning districts. The Airport Environs (AE) overlay district regulates land
uses that may affect navigable airspace consistent with 14CFR Part 77. The Airport Operations (AO) overlay zone
regulates land uses in the vicinity of the airport consistent with the 1996 MCACLUP.
Table A below summarizes the existing land use compatibility measures established by the County of Mendocino and
City of Ukiah.
Page 426 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 2
Established Compatibility Measures
Mendocino County General Plan (Adopted August 2009)
x Policy DE-165: Improve airport facilities and encourage
economic development and uses that support airport
viability.
x Policy DE-166: Land use decisions and development
should be carried out in a manner that will reduce
aviation-related hazards (including hazards to aircraft,
and hazards posed by aircraft). This could be
accomplished through a variety of measures, including
the following: maintaining compatible zoning, land uses,
densities, and intensities within airport influence zones;
protecting the viability of existing airport operations and
expansion potential.
x Policy DE-167: Development in air traffic patterns,
corridors, and airport influence zones shall be
consistent with the Mendocino County Airport
Comprehensive Land Use Plan and California Division
of Aeronautics and Federal Aviation Administration
regulations.
x Action Item DE-167.1: Update the Airport
Comprehensive Land Use Plan when changes in the
aviation sector or airport use warrant a revision of
land use restrictions.
City of Ukiah General Plan (Adopted December 6, 1995)
x Goal AE-1: Promote the airport for the community’s
benefit both now and in the future
x Policy AE-1.1: Recognize that the airport’s vitality and
growth help achieve the General Plan Vision.
x Goal AE-2: Provide for long-term viability of the airport.
x Policy AE-2.1: Define the long-term growth
boundaries for the airport.
x Goal AE-3: Establish uniform ordinances and
regulations for land use in the airport’s core and
peripheral overlay zones.
x Policy AE-3.1: Work with the County to develop a
similar or duplicate implementing code for
development in and around the airport.
x Policy AE-3.2: Promote acceptable land uses for both
city and county zones in the core and peripheral zone
areas.
x Goal AE-4: Promote a “good neighbor policy” by the
airport and its users.
x Policy AE-4.1: Develop a Noise Control program.
x Policy AE-4.2: Identify common noise levels in and
around the airport to identify “airport -specific” noise.
Ukiah Valley Area Plan, Section 3, Land Use and
Community Development (Adopted by Mendocino
County August 2, 2011)
x Goal LU2: Promote compatible land uses adjacent to
important transportation facilities and protect against
incompatible ones.
x Policy LU 2.1: Define acceptable standards for
development in the vicinity of the airport.
x Policy LU 2.1a: Clear Zone: Prohibit development in
the clear zone as defined in the Ukiah Municipal
Airport Master Plan.
x Policy LU 2.1b: Compatibility Guidelines: Only allow
development within each airport zone that conforms
to the height, use, and intensity specified in the land
use compatibility table of the ACLUP. As airports
evolve and fuel prices change, collaborate with the
City of Ukiah, the County Airport Land Use
Commission, and Caltrans Aeronautics to reassess
compatibility issues.
Ukiah Valley Area Plan, Section 5, Circulation and
Transportation (Adopted by Mendocino County August 2,
2011)
x Goal CT1: Provide for efficient and safe circulation
networks throughout the Ukiah Valley.
x Policy CT1.1: Promote the development of an
integrated transportation corridor through the Valley
x Policy CT1.1a Identification of Integrated
Transportation Corridor: work with local and regional
agencies to define and develop an integrated
transportation corridor. The integrated transportation
corridor shall encompass U.S. Highway 101; major
thoroughfares; and rail, air, and public transportation
to proactively manage travel demand by identifying
underutilized capacity in the corridor and shift travel
demand accordingly.
Source: Data Compiled by Mead & Hunt (March 2020)
Table A
General Plan Policies
County of Mendocino and City of Ukiah
Page 427 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
General Plan Policy - Findings
Compared to the Ukiah Municipal Airport section of the current MCACLUP, the proposed UKIALUCP includes changes
to the shape and size of the Compatibility Zones as well as the compatibility criteria applicable within each
Compatibility Zone consistent with statewide compatibility guidance. In accordance with Government Code Section
65302.3, these changes will require both the County and City to amend their respective land use planning documents
(i.e., General Plans and Overlay Zoning Districts) to be consistent with the proposed UKIALUCP or take steps to
overrule the ALUC. This step will be necessary as confirmation that the County and City intend to adhere to the
proposed UKIALUCP compatibility criteria rather than those in the current MCACLUP. To attain consistency with the
proposed UKIALUCP, the general plans need only reference the proposed UKIALUCP by name and date. Additionally,
the County and City airport-related overlay zoning districts and zone boundaries will need to be amended to
specifically reflect the Airport Influence Area, Compatibility Zones, and criteria of the proposed UKIALUCP once
adopted by the Mendocino County ALUC.
Land Use Designations
To achieve general plan consistency with the proposed UKIALUCP, there should be no direct conflicts between
planned land uses in the local jurisdictions’ general plan maps and the proposed UKIALUCP criteria. Existing land uses
that may conflict can remain, as can general plan land use designations that reflect them, as the Mendocino County
ALUC has no authority over existing land uses. The proposed UKIALUCP compatibility zones and criteria are the
primary policy instruments used in determining if the general plan’s land use designations are consistent with the
proposed UKIALUCP.
Land Use Designations – Evaluation
As described above, the proposed UKIALUCP includes extending the Airport Influence Area to the north by 465-feet to
reflect the future runway extension shown in the FAA-adopted Ukiah Municipal Airport Layout Plan. Additionally, the
proposed UKIALUCP proposes changes to the shape and size of the UKI Compatibility Zones from those in the current
MCACLUP based on current statewide compatibility guidance. Exhibit 3 compares the Compatibility Zones from the
1996 MCACLUP with those of the proposed UKIALUCP. The areas where the proposed UKIALUCP would impose
greater restrictions on future land uses compared to the current MCACLUP are identified in red.
Exhibit 5 tabulates the degree to which the proposed UKIALUCP density (dwelling units per acre) and intensity
(people per acre) criteria are more stringent than those of the current MCACLUP. For example, within the current
MCACLUP Zone B2, the density limit is 0.5 dwelling units per acre (2-acre lots) with infill development allowed in the
City of Ukiah of up to 28 dwelling units per acre. The proposed UKIALUCP limits residential densities in the
corresponding zone to a maximum of 0.1 dwelling units (10-acre lots) and does not include a provision for infill
development. As such, within the unincorporated portions of the County, future residential densities would be
reduced from 0.5 dwelling units per acre (2-acre lots) down to 0.1 dwelling units per acre (10-acre lots) to maintain
consistency with the proposed UKIALUCP. Within the incorporated portions of the City of Ukiah, residential densities
would be reduced from 28 dwelling units per acre to 0.1 dwelling units per acre (10-acre lots).
Page 428 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
Exhibit 5 also identifies where the proposed UKIALUCP restrictions are less stringent than those of the current
MCACLUP. For example, within Zones 3 and 4, the proposed UKIALUCP provides an Urban Overlay Zone allowing
residential densities of up to 15 dwelling units per acre in Zone 3 and 35 dwelling units per acre in Zone 4.
The following consistency evaluations were conducted to identify potential conflicts between the proposed UKIALUCP
and local general plan land use designations:
1. Nonresidential Uses – A qualitative assessment is conducted to determine the degree to which the proposed
UKIALUCP would restrict future nonresidential land use development within the proposed Airport Influence
Area. The assessment focuses on where the proposed UKIALUCP intensity criteria (people per acre) are either
more stringent or less stringent than the intensity criteria of the current MCACLUP.
2. Residential Uses – The assessment compares the density (dwelling units per acre) criteria of the proposed
UKIALUCP with the density limits provided under the County’s and City’s zoning classifications.
Nonresidential Land Use Evaluation
Exhibit 5 identifies the zones wherein the intensity criteria of the proposed UKIALUCP are more restrictive than the
current MCACLUP criteria (e.g., portions of Zones 1, 2, 3, and 6). In these areas, future nonresidential development
may be prohibited or restricted to ensure that the proposed land use complies with the intensity criteria of the
proposed UKIALUCP. Exhibit 5 also indicates where the proposed UKIALUCP intensity criteria are less stringent than
the current MCACLUP (e.g., portions of Zones 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6).
Under the current MCACLUP, for example, the intensity limit within portions of Zone A* located off-airport allows an
average of 10.0 people per acre. Under the proposed UKIALUCP, where Zone A* falls within Zone 1, all nonresidential
development would be prohibited, and only structures and facilities required for aeronautical purposes would be
allowed. Most of Zone 1 falls within the airport property boundary; therefore, no conflict would result. However, two
City zoning classifications fall within the outer portions of Zone 1 that are not owned by the Airport: Manufacturing
and Community Commercial. These affected properties would be precluded from erecting nonaeronautical structures
or permitting outdoor activities allowing assemblages of people. Although displacement of nonresidential
development could occur in Zone 1, as well as in portions of Zones 2, 3, and 6, these uses could be accommodated
elsewhere within the proposed Airport Influence Area provided that these uses can satisfy the relaxed intensity
criteria provided in the proposed UKIALUCP. For this reason, the potential displacement of nonresidential uses is
deemed to be less than significant.
Although relaxation of the proposed UKIALUCP intensity criteria within certain compatibility zones would result in less
conflicts between local general plans and the proposed UKIALUCP, this circumstance also has the potential to induce
growth within those portions of the proposed Airport Influence Area as it would relax the intensity criteria of the
County’s and City’s airport-related overlay zoning districts. Nevertheless, this growth-inducing potential under the
proposed UKIALUCP would not increase levels of development above those projected within the County’s and City’s
respective general plans. As a result, this circumstance is deemed to be less than significant.
Page 429 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
Exhibits 7A through 7D identify the seven parcels that fall within the newly proposed Zone 1* of the revised
UKIALUCP (Final Draft Apil 2021): 5 parcels in the City of Ukiah (North) and 2 parcels in unincorporated Mendocino
County (South). Five parcels are developed and two are vacant. Under the draft UKIALUCP (Public Draft July 2020),
portions of these parcels could be developed under Zone 2 criteria. Under the revised UKIALUCP (Final Draft January
2021), some or all the Zone 2 development potential is removed as these areas would become part of the more
restrictive Compatibility Zone 1*. Although these parcels have reduced development potential under the Final Draft
2021 UKIALUCP compared to the Public Draft 2020 UKIALUCP, the redevelopment potential within the remaining
areas that will now be in Compatibility Zone 2 is still greater than that provided under Zone A* of the currently in
effect 1996 MACLUP. Lastly, since land use restrictions are identical between 1996 MACLUP Zone A* and Final Draft
2021 UKIALUCP Zone 1*, no theoretical displacement would occur. Therefore, the impact to parcels underlying Zone
1* is deemed to be less than significant.
Residential Land Use Conflicts
To identify potential conflicts with the proposed UKIALUCP, the proposed Compatibility Zones were overlaid onto the
general plan land use maps for the County of Mendocino (Exhibit 6) and the City of Ukiah (Exhibit 4). The
compatibility zones that could potentially prohibit or restrict future residential densities (dwelling units per acre)
were compared to the allowable densities provided in the local agencies’ zoning classifications. A conflict would arise
if the general plan residential densities exceed the proposed UKIALUCP density criteria. Resolving these land use
conflicts can necessitate changes to future land use development patterns by shifting or “displacing” the location of
that development to less restrictive areas of the proposed Airport Influence Area or to other parts of the community
where there are no proposed UKIALUCP restrictions. Displacement involves changes to the patterns of land use
development that has not yet occurred. The proposed UKIALUCP has no effect on existing land uses; therefore, no
displacement of existing development would occur as a result of adoption of the proposed UKIALUCP.
Exhibit 4 identifies the compatibility zones wherein the proposed UKIALUCP establishes more stringent density
restrictions on residential uses compared to the current MCACLUP (e.g., portions of Zones 2, 3, and 4). Exhibits 8a
and 8b in Section 14, Population and Housing, identify the zoning classifications permitting residential uses. The
analysis compares the residential densities (dwelling units per acre) permitted under local zoning classifications with
the density limits established in the proposed UKIALUCP. Where the densities of the zoning classification exceeds the
proposed UKIALUCP density criteria (i.e., allow more future residential units than would be permitted under the
proposed UKIALUCP), the number of housing units that could not be accommodated within portions of the proposed
Airport Influence Area (i.e., displaced) is quantified. A positive number represents the theoretic displacement of
housing units and a conflict between local land use plans and the proposed UKIALUCP. A negative number indicates
that the proposed UKIALUCP applies less stringent restrictions on residential densities than County and City zoning
and indicates no conflicts between these plans.
As indicated in Exhibits 8a and 8b, certain zoning classifications conflict with several of the proposed UKIALUCP
density criteria resulting in a potential displacement of future housing units. However, as indicated in Section 14,
Population and Housing, the theoretic displacement of future housing is anticipated to be less than significant as
areas inside and outside of the proposed Airport Influence Area are anticipated to be able to accommodate the
Page 430 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
theoretic displacement. As such, this theoretic displacement potential would not affect the County’s or City’s ability
to fulfill its obligations associated with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation numbers established by the California
Department of Housing and Community Development.
For the areas where the proposed UKIALUCP would relax the density criteria, there could be the potential for the
proposed UKIALUCP to induce growth within certain portions of the proposed Airport Influence Area as it would relax
the density criteria of the County’s and City’s airport-related overlay zoning district. However, this growth-inducing
potential under the proposed UKIALUCP would not increase levels of development above those projected within the
general plans adopted by the affected local agencies. Additionally, the airport-related overlay zoning districts, once
amended to be consistent with the proposed UKIALUCP, are anticipated to remove all potential conflicts between the
primary zoning district (or general plan land use designation) and the proposed UKIALUCP. Therefore, no changes to
the general plan land use maps are required.
Mitigation
None Required.
Page 431 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
12. Mineral Resources
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Discussion
a - b): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The Mendocino County General Plan and
City of Ukiah General Plan designates lands rich in mineral resources that are of regional and statewide significance.
No “Mineral Resource Zones” are located within the proposed Airport Influence Area. Additionally, the proposed
UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the
environment that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to mineral resources.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 432 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
13. Noise
Would the proposed project result in: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the area to excessive noise
levels?
f) For a project located in the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
Discussion
a – e): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The proposed Airport Influence Area has
the potential to contain a wide variety of noise sensitive receptors, both known and unknown. However, the
proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature; it does not propose any new development, construction, or physical
change to the environment that would directly or indirectly result in exposing persons to noise or generating noise.
Pursuant to the State Aeronautics Act, the purpose of the ALUCP is to minimize the public’s exposure to aircraft noise
within the Airport vicinity. Therefore, adoption and implementation of the proposed UKIALUCP would not generate
new sources of aviation-related noise or expose people residing and working in the vicinity of the Airport to excessive
noise.
Airport-related noise and its impacts on land uses were considered in the development of the proposed UKIALUCP.
The 1996 Airport Master Plan’s forecast projected some 57,000 annual operations. The forecast of 30,916 annual
Page 433 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
operations, developed for the purposes of the proposed UKIALUCP, is based on the current annual operations of
15,458 according to the FAA 5010 Airport Master Record. Of the 15,458 annual operations, approximately 887 are
CalFire operations. Currently, there are an average of 42 operations daily. The forecast noise contours are described
in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), the metric adopted by the State of California for land use
planning purposes. In accordance with PUC Section 21675(a), the Airport forecast noise contours cover the requisite
20-year planning timeframe and represent 30,916 future annual aircraft operations. The ALUCP does not regulate the
operation of aircraft or the noise produced by that activity. State law (PUC Section 21674(e)) explicitly denies the
ALUC authority over such matters.
The Airport noise contours are one of four compatibility factors used to establish the compatibility zones for the
proposed UKIALUCP. The ALUCP establishes criteria that reduce the potential exposure of people to excessive
aircraft-related noise by limiting residential densities (dwelling units per acre), establishing interior noise level limits,
and restricting other noise-sensitive land uses in locations exposed to noise levels in excess of 60 dB CNEL. Thus,
adoption of the proposed UKIALUCP would not expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise
levels.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 434 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
14. Population and Housing
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacem ent housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Discussion
a) As noted in Section 11, Land Use and Planning, the proposed UKIALUCP includes less stringent intensity and
density criteria in one or more compatibility zones. Although relaxing the proposed UKIALUCP criteria could
potentially induce population growth within certain portions of the Airport Influence Area, the proposed UKIALUCP
would not increase levels of development above those projected within the general plans adopted by the affected
local agencies. The environmental effects of development proposed in the adopted general plans have already been
adequately analyzed in previously certified environmental documentation and policies and/or mitigation measures
have been adopted that would reduce those environmental effects. Additionally, any future development proposals
or general plan/zoning amendments would be subject to CEQA, ensuring that potential impacts are studied,
disclosed, and mitigated as appropriate.
Potential Displacement of Future Housing
Jurisdictions are mandated by state law to accommodate their share of the regional housing needs (Government
Code Section 65580). State law also requires jurisdictions to amend their respective general plans to be consistent
with the ALUCP or to take special steps to overrule the ALUC (Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a)). Modifying a
general plan for consistency with the ALUCP has the potential to restrict a jurisdiction’s ability to satisfy its share of
the regional housing needs, as an ALUCP may preclude or limit the future development of housing units within
portions of the Airport Influence Area.
Impact Analysis
To address potential impacts to the County’s and City’s future housing resources, an analysis was conducted to
determine the amount of developable residential acreage and the number of future dwelling units that could be
potentially precluded from portions of the Airport Influence Area. The analysis compares the residential densities
(dwelling units per acre) permitted under local general plans with the density limits established in the proposed
Page 435 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
UKIALUCP. Where the general plan densities exceed the proposed UKIALUCP density criteria (i.e., allow more future
residential units than would be permitted under the proposed UKIALUCP), the number of housing units that could not
be accommodated within portions of the Airport Influence Area (i.e., displaced) is quantified.
As noted in Section 11, Land Use and Planning (see page 26), several planned residential land use designations
associated with the County’s and City’s respective general plans are potentially impacted by the proposed UKIALUCP.
The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether the proposed UKIALUCP could impact the ability of the County of
Mendocino or City of Ukiah in meeting its respective share of the Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) as
established by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
The displacement analysis is summarized in Exhibits 8a and 8b. The analysis is done on a community-wide (zone-by-
zone) basis and does not reflect where an individual parcel may lose its development potential or where another
parcel may gain a density increase (parcel-by-parcel assessment).
The displacement analysis considers three project alternatives:
x Proposed Project – Adoption of the proposed UKIALUCP, which includes the Urban Overlay in Zones 3 and 4
(north) in the City of Ukiah and Zone 3 (southwest) in unincorporated Mendocino County.
x Project Alternative – Adoption of the proposed UKIALUCP without the Urban Overlay Zone.
x No Project Alternative – No adoption of the proposed UKIALUCP and continuance of the current MCACLUP.
The analysis begins with identifying zoning designations allowing residential uses within the proposed UKIALUCP
Compatibility Zones. Based on the number of acres of each land use type found within the proposed Compatibility
Zone, the allowable density is calculated to determine the total number of dwelling units allowed under the following
plans:
x County’s and City’s zoning classifications,
x Proposed Project (UKIALUCP with Urban Overlay),
x Project Alternative (no Urban Overlay), and
x No Project Alternative (continuation of current MCACLUP).
The potential displacement is calculated by comparing the allowable density under the three project scenarios with
the allowable density provided by the County and City zoning classifications. In Exhibits 8a and 8b, a positive number
represents the theoretic displacement of housing units; a negative number indicates that the proposed UKIALUCP
applies less stringent restrictions on residential densities than County and City zoning. If the proposed Project results
in a theoretic displacement, the number is compared with the No Project Alternative to determine if the proposed
UKIALUCP is more stringent than the current MCACLUP that currently guides land use development decision within
the airport environs. The results documented in Exhibits 8a and 8b indicate the following:
x In most instances, the proposed Project does not result in residential displacement.
x The proposed Project is the least restrictive on residential development compared to the Project Alternative
(no Urban Overlay Zone) and No Project Alternative (current MCACLUP).
x Potential displacement is concentrated in:
Page 436 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3
o Zone 2 (south) in unincorporated Mendocino County and accounts for a theoretic displacement of 41
units; and
o Zones 2 and 3 (north) in the City of Ukiah accounts for a theoretic displacement of 170 units.
The County’s and City’s ability to meet its respective RHNA is described below.
County of Mendocino
The County of Mendocino’s current Housing Element (2019-2027) was adopted August 2018. The adopted Housing
Element indicates that the County’s Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) is 1,845 units by 2027. The adopted
Housing Element indicates that the current number of Occupied Household Units is 34,870 and the Projected
Household Units is 36,715 by 2027 (an increase of 1,845 units). As stated in the adopted Housing Element, there is a
significant amount of vacant land given the rural nature of Mendocino County. However, substantial proportions of
vacant or underutilized lands surrounding the City of Ukiah, which are deemed most conducive for higher density
residential development, are located either in a flood zone, airport zone, or situated near a fault zone.
Based on the displacement calculations summarized in Exhibit 8a, the theoretic displacement of up to 41 units
represents a less than significant amount for the following reasons:
x Under the County’s General Plan, a total of 1,229 units (existing and future) can be accommodated within the
unincorporated portions of the proposed Airport Influence Area. Although residential development exists,
undeveloped areas remain available for future residential housing and could accommodate the theoretic
displacement of 41 units.
x Under the proposed UKIALUCP, a total of 4,667 total units (existing and future) could be allowed within
certain areas of the proposed Airport Influence Area. If prudent, there could be opportunities for the County
to change local zoning to allow increased residential development in certain areas of the proposed Airport
Influence Area to accommodate additional residential development.
For these reasons, unincorporated areas of the County, both inside and outside of the proposed Airport Influence
Area, are anticipated to be able to accommodate the theoretic displacement of up to 41 units. As such, this theoretic
displacement potential would not affect the County’s ability to fulfill its obligations associated with the RHNA.
City of Ukiah
The City of Ukiah’s current Housing Element (2019-2027) was adopted October 2019 and certified by HCD in
December 2019. The adopted Housing Element indicates that the City’s RHNA is 239 units within the 2019-2027
planning cycle. The adopted Housing Element indicates current Household Units is 6,572 (2018) and also indicates the
Projected Household Units is 6,811, reflecting an increase of 239 units. The adopted Housing Element also indicates
that the City has 161 vacant units suitable for low-income and very low-income groups and 165 vacant units suitable
for moderate and above moderate-income groups (326 total units). The theoretic displacement of up to 170 units can
be accommodated by the City’s available vacant housing stock.
Also, as indicated in Exhibit 8b, the General Plan allows a total of 16,442 units (existing and future) within the
incorporated areas of the proposed Airport Influence Area. The current housing stock represents only 40 percent of
Page 437 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
this total residential development potential (6,572 units / 16,442 units). Additionally, under the proposed UKIALUCP,
a total of 14,415 units (existing and future) could be allowed within certain areas of the proposed Airport Influence
Area and could accommodate the theoretic displacement of 170 units.
Therefore, the theoretic displacement of 170 units, which represents about 1 percent of the total residential
development potential in the City (170 units / 16,442 units), is deemed to be less than significant because it would
not affect the City’s ability to fulfill its obligations associated with the RHNA and because the displaced housing units
could be accommodated in other incorporated areas inside or outside the proposed Airport Influence Area.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 438 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
15. Public Services
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times, or other performance
objectives for any of the following public services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
Discussion
a.i – a.iv): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The proposed Airport Influence Area
contains and has the potential to contain a wide variety of public services in the future. The proposed UKIALUCP is
regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the environment
that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to listed government facilities or services.
a.v): Adoption and implementation of the proposed UKIALUCP would create a temporary increase in the staff
workloads as a result of the state requirement to modify the local general plan to be consistent with the proposed
UKIALUCP. As described in Section 10 of this Initial Study, minor changes and/or additions would be needed to bring
the local general plans and Airport-related overlay zoning ordinances into consistency with the proposed UKIALUCP.
Over the long-term, procedural policies included in the proposed UKIALUCP will simplify and clarify the ALUC project
review process, thereby reducing the workload for ALUC staff and planning staffs of the County of Mendocino and the
City of Ukiah.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 439 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
16. Recreation
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Discussion
a - b): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). A wide range of recreational facilities are
found in Mendocino County. Therefore, the proposed Airport Influence Area has the potential to contain a wide
variety of recreational resources, both known and unknown. The proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does
not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the environment that would directly or
indirectly result in any impacts to recreation.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 440 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
17. Transportation and Traffic
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing
the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Discussion
a – d): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The Mendocino County General Plan and
City of Ukiah General Plan identify a wide range of existing and planned transportation modes, including roads,
transit, non-motorized transportation, rail, and aviation.. On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed
Senate Bill (SB) 743 into law and started a process intended to fundamentally change transportation impact analysis
as part of CEQA compliance. These changes included elimination of auto delay, level of service (LOS), and other
similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts.
Amendments and additions to the CEQA Guidelines eliminated auto delay for CEQA purposes and identified vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) as the preferred CEQA transportation metric. SB 743 became effective on July 1, 2020. Prior to
that date, the SB 743 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Regional Baseline Study was accepted by the Mendocino Council
of Governments at their regular meeting on June 1, 2020. This study recommends VMT methods and thresholds for
lead agencies in Mendocino County, as well as transportation demand management (TDM) strategies for reducing
VMT on projects. It should be noted that adoption and implementation of the proposed UKIALUCP will not result in
any substantial change to VMT within the Airport Influence Areas, as the project is a regulatory tool to ensure
development is compatible with existing and proposed airport uses. Therefore, the proposed Airport Influence Area
contains and has the potential to contain a wide variety of transportation systems in the future. However, the
proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical
change to the environment that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to on-ground transportation and
traffic
c): Neither the ALUC nor the policies set forth in the proposed UKIALUCP have authority over Airport operations (PUC
Section 21674(e)). However, in accordance with state law (PUC Section 21676), certain off-Airport development
proposals that could have Airport compatibility implications are subject to ALUC review. Nonetheless, adoption and
implementation of the proposed UKIALUCP will not result in any change to air traffic patterns at Ukiah Municipal
Airport.
Page 441 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
Mitigation
None required.
Page 442 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
18. Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the
size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and this is:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k) or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion
and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code section 5024.1. In apply the criteria set forth
in subdivision (c) of the Public Resources Code section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe.
Discussion
a – b): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). A Tribal Cultural Resource is a site feature,
place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object that is of cultural value to a Tribe. The Mendocino County General
Plan and City of Ukiah General Plan indicate that no tribal lands exist within vicinity of the Ukiah Municipal Airport.
However, the proposed Airport Influence Area has the potential to contain a wide variety of tribal cultural resources,
both known and unknown. Nevertheless, the proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new
development, construction, or physical change to the environment that would directly or indirectly result in any
impacts to tribal cultural resources.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 443 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
19. Utilities and Service Systems
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new
or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water
drainage; electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Discussion
a – g): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The proposed Airport Influence Area
contains and has the potential to contain a wide variety of utilities and service systems in the future. The proposed
UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature. It does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the
environment that would directly or indirectly result in any impacts to utilities and service systems.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 444 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
20. Wildfire
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landsides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
Discussion
a - d): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). Within the proposed AIA, the fire hazard
severity zones include moderate, high, and very high severities. The proposed UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature; it
does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the environment that would directly or
indirectly impair an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan, exacerbate wildfire risks, or expose people or
structures to significant risks.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 445 of 550
INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION | Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 4
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance
Would the proposed project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten
to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Have impacts that would be individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
c) Have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Discussion
a - c): See Summary of Potential Environmental Effects (No. 11 on page 7). The proposed Airport Influence Area has
the potential to contain a wide variety of environmental resources, both known and unknown. The proposed
UKIALUCP is regulatory in nature; it does not propose any new development, construction, or physical change to the
environment that would directly or indirectly result in a substantial adverse effect on the environment or human
beings or substantially degrade the environment.
As indicated in the analysis provided for Environmental Category 14, Population and Housing, adoption of the
proposed UKIALUCP has the potential to displace future residential and nonresidential development to other areas
within the community. Although the proposed UKIALUCP has the potential to induce growth within portions of the
Airport Influence Area, the increased levels of development would not exceed those projected within the general
plans adopted by the affected local agencies. As discussed under Environmental Category 15, Public Services, some
staff effort would be required to revise the local jurisdictions’ general plans and/or implementing ordinances.
However, this effort would be temporary and result in a simplified review process following the proposed UKIALUCP
adoption. Therefore, adoption and implementation of the proposed UKIALUCP has no potential to create
cumulatively significant environmental impacts.
Mitigation
None required.
Page 446 of 550
55
1
2
3 3
3 3
4
2
4 6
6
6
Boon
v
i
l
l
e
Ukia
h
R
d
.
Ukiah
33
15
6
6
6
Mendocino County
(Unincorporated)
Mendocino County
(Unincorporated)
Gobbi St.
Low Gap R
d
.
Vich
y
S
p
r
i
n
g
s
R
d
.
Talmage Rd.
Ea
s
t
s
i
d
e
R
d
.
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
1
0
1
Hastings Ave.
Gobalet St.
D
o
r
a
S
t
.
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
P
a
r
k
B
l
v
d
.
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
.
Ukiah
Compatibility Zones
Zone 1: Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
Zone 1*: Ultimate Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
Zone 2: Inner Aprroach/Departure Zone
Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone
Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5: Sideline Zone
Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
Urban Overlay Zone
Other Airport Environs
Source: Mead & Hunt, Inc.
04,0008,000
Feet
F
Notes
1.All Compatibility Zones: Reflect safety zones for a
General Aviation Runway with Single-Sided Traffic
Pattern provided in the 2011 California Airport Land Use
Planning Handbook (Handbook).
Zone 1: Based on the Runway Protection Zones
(RPZs) provided in City and FAA approved Airport
Layout Plan (2016). Zone 1* reflects an ultimate
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) for an ultimate
runway length of 5,000 feet to serve future operations
by CalFire Lockheed C-130 aircraft.
Zones 2 and 4 (north): Zone 2 reflects Handbook
Safety Zone 2 for existing Runway 15 end. Zone 4
includes outer portions of Handbook Safety Zone 2 for
future Runway 15 end. Future northerly runway
extension is intended to provide additional runway length
for departures to south; landing threshold at Runway 15
end will remain in its current position.
Zones 2 – 4 (south): Offset by 5-degrees to reflect
southern flight route where aircraft use Highway 101
as a landmark
Urban Overlay Zone: Provides a density increase
within Zones 3 and 4 to North and Zone 3 to Southwest
to reflect existing land use patterns.
Compatibility Policy Map
Ukiah Municipal Airport
Mendocino County
Airport Land Use Commission
(Addendum #1, January 2021)
Ukiah Municipal Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan
Legend
Existing Runway (4,423' Ex. Length)
Future Runway Extension (4,888' Fut. Length)
Existing Airport Property Boundary
City Limit Boundary
!
!!
!
!!
City Sphere of Influence (extends off map view)
Airport Influence Area
3
3
Hastings AS
t
a
3
1
2
1*
Talmage Rd.
(112'x700')
3
1
1*
2
3
(112'x700')
INSET
INSET
Norgard
L
n
.
Hw
y
.
1
0
1
Attachment 3
Page 447 of 550
1
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH
ADDING SECTION 9004 TO DIVISION 9, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 1 OF
THE CITY CODE TO REQUIRE COMPLIANCE WITH THE UKIAH
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN.
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows:
SECTION ONE. FINDINGS
1. The Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) adopted the Ukiah
Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) on May 20, 2021.
2.The ALUCP sets compatibility criteria applicable to local agencies, including the City of
Ukiah, in their preparation or amendment of land use plans and ordinances and to
landowners in their design of new development.
3.As such, all zoning and districting plans applicable in the City must be in substantial
conformance with the ALUCP.
4.The City of Ukiah (Responsible Agency), is relying on the Initial Study and Negative
Declaration adopted by the Lead Agency, ALUC.
SECTION TWO.
A new Section 9004 in Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 1 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby
added and shall read as follows:
§9004 ZONING IN CONFORMANCE WITH UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT LAND USE
COMPATIBILITY PLAN
The zoning and districting plans effectuated by this Chapter are in substantial
conformance with the Ukiah Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan heretofore
adopted by the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission.
SECTION THREE.
1.Publication: Within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, this Ordinance shall be
published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah. In lieu of
publishing the full text of the Ordinance, the City may publish a summary of the Ordinance
once 5 days prior to its adoption and again within fifteen (15) days after its adoption.
3.Effective Date: The ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its
adoption.
Introduced by title only on __________, 2021, by the following roll call vote:
Attachment 4
Page 448 of 550
2
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Adopted on ___________, 2021, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_______________
Juan V. Orozco, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Page 449 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 12.a.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2020-352
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Receive Status Report and Consider Any Action or Direction Related to the Novel Coronavirus
(COVID-19) Emergency Including Operational Preparedness and Response; Continuity of City Operations and
Services; Community and Business Impacts; and Any Other Related Matters.
DEPARTMENT: City Manager /
Admin PREPARED BY: Tami Bartolomei, Office of Emergency
Management Coordinator
PRESENTER: Tami Bartolomei, Office of Emergency
Management Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Summary: The City Council will receive a status report and consider any action or direction related to the
Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Emergency including operational preparedness and response; continuity of
City operations and services; community and business impacts; and any other related matters.
Background: On March 4, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom declared a State of Emergency in
California in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The County of Mendocino declared a State of Emergency related to the COVID-19 on March 4, 2020.
On March 17, 2020, the City Manager, acting as the Director of Emergency Services, declared the existence
of a local emergency.
On March 18, 2020, City Council approved a Resolution ratifying the proclamation declaring the existence of a
local emergency.
Since the onset of the emergency, the City of Ukiah has worked to respond to the public health and safety
needs of the community in cooperation with the County of Mendocino and other partners. The local response
for public health is lead regionally by the County of Mendocino and the County's Public Health Officer. In
addition, the City of Ukiah has worked to maintain the continuity of public services including public safety,
water, sewer, electric, airport, public works, and other essential activities.
Discussion: As the coronavirus “COVID-19” continues to evolve, the City of Ukiah continues to monitor the
situation and respond to emerging needs of the community. The City is in continued contact with local and
state agencies, as well as community partners, hospitals, schools, and neighboring cities to ensure we have
the most updated information pertaining to COVID-19 and are coordinating efforts.
Reports and/or information from the City of Ukiah's Emergency Operation Center (EOC) may include, as
necessary:
* Emergency Operation Center (EOC) Status
* COVID-19 Case Updates
* Public Information Officer
* Medical Services
Page 450 of 550
Page 2 of 2
* School/Education
* Public Safety (Police/Fire/EMS)
* Shelter in Place Monitoring and Compliance
* Community Service Groups
* Homeless Response
* Business Impacts/Services
* Public Infrastructure/Construction Status
* City Finance
* Recovery Efforts and Planning
* Other Related matters
Staff will provide a status report to City Council and will seek direction or action on operational preparedness
and response; continuity of City operations and services; community and business impacts; and any other
related matters.
Go to the City's website (www.cityofukiah.com) for direct access to information related to the Novel
Coronavirus (COVID-19) emergency including local updates, City Services, Community/Resident Information,
and Business Resources.
Recommended Action: Receive status report and consider any action or direction related to the Novel
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Emergency including operational preparedness and response; continuity of City
operations and services; community and business impacts; and any other related matters.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Page 451 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 12.b.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2020-438
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval and Adoption of 2021-22 Fiscal Year City Budget through Resolution, Five-Year Capital
Improvement Plan, the Gann Limit Resolution, Associated Financial and Debt Management Policy
Resolutions, and Budget Agreement with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District.
DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director
PRESENTER:
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Dan Buffalo, Finance Director
Mary Horger, Financial Services Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. FY 21-22 Budget Resolution
2. CIP -5 year-FYE 2022 - In Progress - Working Final Draft 06-07-2021
3. Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Justifications - FY 21-22revised
4. Gann Limit Resolution 2022
5. Budget Agreement with UVSD, Draft 6-10-21
6. Financial Management Policy Resolution Combined
7. Financial Management (PR-39) Update 2021 - line out
8. Debt Management Policy Resolution Combined
9. AR-002, Debt Management Policy, update 2021 - line out
Summary: The Council will consider for approval and adoption through resolution the City budget for the
20201-22 fiscal year, the City's Five-Year Capital Improvement Program Plan, the City's Gann Limit for the
2021-22 fiscal year, the wastewater budget agreement with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District for 2021-22,
Financial Management Policies, and the Debt Management Policy.
Background: Presented here is the operating and capital budget for the City of Ukiah and related documents
for the fiscal year 2021-22. This is the final step of the budget development and adoption process.
As part of this packet, the following are provided:
1. Budget unit pages (OpenGov stories). The Finance Department continues to enhance the usability and
navigation of the budget document, turning to the OpenGov platform to deliver the budget document in its
entirety. Budget units (departments and divisions) are presented in standardized format in what are called
"stories." They are dynamic, navigable web pages designed to be read electronically through a web browser.
They offer the reader drill down features so that data can be presented as generally or as granularly as
desired.
The best way to access stories is by clicking this link and finding each subsequent link in the table of contents:
https://stories.opengov.com/ukiahca/published/nYEwambvu
This page is the cover of the budget document (in draft), including a table of contents at the bottom. Each
budget story can be accessed by clicking on its respective link in the table of contents. As the budget
document is further developed, links will be activated for any reader to examine.
Page 452 of 550
Page 2 of 2
The OpenGov platform is best viewed through the Google Chrome web browser. It is a free application and
can be found at the following link, complete with download and installation instructions.
https://www.google.com/chrome/
Discussion: To adopt the budget, Council will approve and adopt:
1. Budget Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the annual City of Ukiah Budget for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
2. Five-year capital improvement program schedule (Attachment 2) and the Vehicle & Heavy Equipment
Justifications (Attachment 3) - resolution not required.
3. The Appropriations (Gann) Limit calculations and associated resolution (Attachment 4). This information is
part of the overall budget document.
4. Budget Agreement with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District for FY 2021-22 (Attachment 5), including
preliminary cost sharing splits, which will be further revised and updated at a later Council meeting in
August. This agreement is presented in substantial form. Staff is requesting Council approve and adopt it as
such and authorize the City Manager to complete any final negotiated changes and sign the agreement. No
further substantive changes are anticipated.
5. City Financial Management Policies resolution (Attachment 6) with a line-item change copy for analysis
(Attachment 7).
6. City Debt Management Policy resolution (Attachment 8) with a line-item change copy for analysis
(Attachment 9).
Recommended Action: Taken Separately:
1. Approve and adopt budget resolution for the fiscal year 2021-22,
2. Approve and adopt Gann Limit resolution for fiscal year 2021-22,
3. Approve (in substantial form) and authorize City Manager to sign fiscal year 2021-22 budget agreement
with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District,
4. Approve and adopt Financial Management Policy resolution, and
5. Approve and adopt Debt Management Policy resolution.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.:N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
Page 453 of 550
Page 1 of 4
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2021 -00
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR
THE GENERAL FUND AND OTHER FUNDS IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-22 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the Ukiah Municipal Code requires the City Manager to prepare and submit an
Annual Budget to the City Council for its approval; and
WHEREAS, it is good management practice to have comprehensive operating and capital
improvement budgets to implement the various policies, programs and projects of the City Council, and
the City Council has established a policy to review, adopt, and provide multiple updates to Fiscal Year
(FY) Budgets; and
WHEREAS, on June 2,2021, the City Council reviewed Draft FY 2021-22 revenue and
expenditures for all budgeted governmental (including the general fund), proprietary, and fiduciary funds;
and
WHEREAS, on June 3, 2021, the City Council reviewed Draft FY 2021-22 revenue and
expenditures for the departmental budget units and capital improvements; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby
adopt the budget for the General Fund and other budgeted funds for Fiscal Year 2021-22.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that,
1. Funds are appropriated at the Fund level for total expenditures, transfers and other uses as
summarized in Exhibit A, attached hereto.
2. Transfers between funds are authorized as summarized in Exhibit B, attached hereto.
3. The FY 2021-22 Budget provides detail to the sources and uses of the authorized
appropriations by fund and the final adopted document is incorporated herein by reference.
4. The City Manager is authorized to approve budget changes between accounts within the
same fund, and that any budget appropriation changes between funds require City Council
approval.
5. The encumbrances outstanding at year-end are reported as committed and, with any
unreserved and undesignated funds remaining on June 30, 2021, are hereby designated as
reserved in fund balance or net position and available for appropriation in FY 2021-22 or future
fiscal years.
Page 454 of 550
Page 2 of 4
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of June 2021, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_______________________________
Juan Orozco, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Page 455 of 550
Page 3 of 4
Page 456 of 550
Page 4 of 4
Attachment “Exhibit B” to Resolution 2021- _____
Page 457 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
FACILITIES/BUILDINGS/LAND
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Todd Grove Park
Pathways Pathways deteriorating beyond repair, need to be replaced.Community
Services Parks 30022200.
80220 18102 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
511 Park
Boulevard
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Deferred 2021 2022 TBD Yes
Current
Revenues General Fund $ 150,000 $ 150,000
Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Prioritization and funding source(s) under
review. Estimated cost is $150k. Added
funding for FYE 22.
Reviewed
McGarvey Park
Pathways Pathways deteriorating beyond repair, need to be replaced.Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80220 18116 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
310 Dora
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2024 2025 TBD No
New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $‐
Moved from FYE 22. Moved from FYE 24.
Prioritization and funding source(s) under
review. Estimated cost is $75k.
Reviewed
McGarvey Park
Irrigation Replace Irrigation System Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80220 18103 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
310 Dora
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2022 2024 TBD No
New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $ 10,000 $ 10,000
Moved from FYE 24. Moved from FYE 22.
Suggest $10k for new landscape plan
before moving irrigation and repaving
paths. Prioritization and funding
source(s) under review. Estimated cost is
$10k for new landscape/irrigation plan,
$100k for construction of irrigation,
plantings, and repaving paths. $10k
recommended for now.
Reviewed
Pool Pump
House
The pool pump house pool is in need of replacement due to age and general deterioration of
the building.
Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80220 18012 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
511 Park
Boulevard
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Deferred 2021 2023 TBD No
New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $‐
Project was formerly called "Pool Block
House". Looking for funding. Moved from
starting FYE 21. Prioritization and funding
source(s) under review. Estimated cost is
$250k.
Reviewed
Riverside Park State grant to provide some grading, flood surveying, debris removal and planting.Community
Services Parks 30522250.
80220 18014 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
1281 East
Gobbi
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land
In
Progress 2018 2021 Grant Yes
New
Revenues Grant funded. $ 281,695 $ 832,005 $ 832,005
RFP for design process is complete
12/2018; Hydrology studies and CEQA
complete. Work expected to start in late
spring or early summer, with expectation
of project completion in FYE 22. Most
recent schedule indicates bidding in the
fall of 21.
Budget
Adopted
Wagenseller
Park Plan Park master plan needed once a site is identified.Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80220 18063 N/A Neil Davis
ndavis@cityofu
kiah.com
Orchard
and Brush
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2022 2023
Capital
Projects No New
Revenues
Potential for Prop
68 funding. $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Reviewed
Wagenseller
Park
Development
In 2017 the Community Development Department began work on a Wagenseller Park
Feasibility Analysis. It has been determined through the analysis and other surveys a park is
needed in the Wagenseller area. Extensive landscaping, equipment purchase and
installation needed.
Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80220 18063 N/A Neil Davis
ndavis@cityofu
kiah.com
Orchard
and Brush
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2023 2024
Capital
Projects No New
Revenues
Staff will continue
to seek grant
funding for
development.
Potential for Prop
68 funding.
$ 875,000 $ 875,000
Working with RCHDC to determine
location along with seeking grant
funding. Reduced the amount from
$950k, to break out the Master Plan into
a separate line item. Moved from FYE
23.
Reviewed
Todd Grove Park
Wall and
Parking Safety
Issues
Develop a conceptual design and maintenance plan for the wall, as well as addressing
parking safety issues around the park. The design would likely including low impact
development features to provide a buffer between vehicles and the wall. Thegoalistogeta
project ready for potential grant funding.
Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80220 18071 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
1281 East
Gobbi
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022 General Yes
New
Revenues
Potential Water
Recharge Grant $ 12,000 $ 12,000
Council refers to Park & Recreation
Commission for review and consideration
for concept and funding for parking &
safety issues. Parks, Recreation and Golf
Committee provided staff with some
suggested action. Staff continues to
research the project. Moved from FYE 21.
Budget
Adopted
Todd Grove Park
and Pool
Recreation
Facility
Addition of Recreation Building to the Pool Facility where the unusable kiddie pool is. This
will eliminate the Splash Pad and Day Camp Office projects from this CIP list. Facility will
serve Day Camp, Recreation Classes, Facility Rentals, Trainings, Meetings, Youth Sports
Practices and Green Room for Concerts.
Community
Services
Parks/Aquatics/
Recreation
10022100.
80220 TBD N/A
Jake
Burgess
jburgess@cityof
ukiah.com
511 Park
Boulevard
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022
Grant
Funded No New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $‐
New project which will eliminate
duplication and serve multiple divisions
and functions. Prioritization and funding
source(s) under review. Estimated cost is
$350k.
Reviewed
Civic Center
front of building
replacement of
tile, clean and
paint.
Tile missing and/or broken, front of building needs cleaning and painting.Community
Services
Building &
Grounds
Maintenance
20822500.
80220 18106 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Facilities/
Buildings/Land
In
Progress 2021 2022 General Yes
New
Revenues
Utilizing Building
Fund Reserves. $ 80,000 $ 80,000
The Civic Center Buildings have been
power washed/cleaned. Project
deferred. Moved $45k from FYE 20, and
moved $35k from FYE 21 due to COVID‐
19. Combined budget for FYE 22 and FYE
23 into one budget for FYE 22.
Reviewed
Civic Center
Bathroom Tile
The tiles in the bathrooms at the Civic Center have come loose and are creating a tripping
hazard. Tile needs to be removed and replaced. Cement floor needs to be treated to
exclude calcium intrusion.
Community
Services
Building &
Grounds
Maintenance
20822500.
80220 18107 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Deferred 2021 2022 General Yes
Current
Revenues
Utilizing Building
Fund Reserves. $ 35,000 $ 35,000 Moved to FYE 22 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Bank of America
Building
Acquisition,
Renovation, and
Services
Relocation
Procurement of BofA building on S. State, rehabilitation, service relocation, and
reconfiguration of Civic Center.
Community
Services
Building &
Grounds
Maintenance
20822500.
80220 18176 N/A
Shannon
Riley
sriley@cityofuki
ah.com
501 South
State Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land
In
Progress 2020 2022
External
Financing Yes New
Revenues
Purchase
Completed FY
2021;
Rehabilitation
Costs TBD,
Funded by Series
2020A Bond
$ 762,562 $ 1,623,233 $ 1,623,233
Council has approved acquisition of
building and is aware of estimated rehab
costs. Council still needs to review
master plan, including transfer of
services and reconfiguration of Civic
Center admin.
Reviewed
and
Supported
Security Fencing
at Ukiah Police
Department
Parking/Entranc
e/Exit Areas
Currently the Ukiah Police Department parks their vehicles, enters and exits the station on
the south side of the Civic Center. This area is unsecured and a high securityrisktothose
entering and exiting the building & vehicles. Securing the area with fencing and gates that
only UPD and Staff have access to will provide the necessary safety needed for the UPD.
Fencing and a gate would be installed near the entrance at Oak Street, follow the driveway
to the Civic Center building. An additional gate would be installed near the Fire bay doors
closer to Dora Street and run down the driveway back toward Oak Street.
Community
Services
Building &
Grounds
Maintenance
20822500.
80220 18187 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2025 2026
New
Revenues No New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $‐
Prioritization and funding source(s) under
review; Department estimate/request is
$189,000; Project is contingent on the
identification of a non General Fund
source. Moved from FYE 21 due to
COVID‐19.
Reviewed
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Project
Number
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name
Comments City Council
Status
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
TotalsProject Contact
Email
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 1
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 458 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
Carpet
Replacement ‐
Police
Department
Offices
The carpet in the Police Department offices is extremely worn with spots that can no longer
be removed, along with some areas that are torn.
Community
Services
Building &
Grounds
Maintenance
20822500.
80220 18176 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022
Internal
Service Yes New
Revenues
Funded by Series
2020A Bond $ 51,000 $ 51,000
Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Part of larger Civic Center service
relocation and reconfiguration project.
Reviewed
Train Depot
HVAC Replace failing HVAC at the Train Depot.Community
Services
Building &
Grounds
Maintenance
20822500.
56120 18255 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
247 East
Perkins
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022 General Yes
New
Revenues $ 8,000 $ 8,000
Unit failed. Heating and air are not
working. Tenants are complaining.
Evaluation from contractor confirms
replacement necessary.
Reviewed
Picnic Area at
Todd Grove Park
The Todd Grove picnic area is in need of replacing the asphalt surface area,barbeque and
tables. There is currently $50,000 in Park Development Funds 25100000.39044 to begin
planning and design of the area.
Community
Services Parks 30022200.
80220 18013 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
600 Live
Oak Avenue
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022
Capital
Projects Yes New
Revenues
Utilizing Park
Development
funds and General
Funds. Will also
be seeking grant
funding.
$ 100,000 $ 100,000 Moved to FYE 22 due to COVID‐19.
Increased from $50k.
Budget
Adopted
Todd Grove Park
Play Equipment
Replacement
The State of California Health and Safety Code calls for all public agencies operating
playgrounds, shall upgrade their playgrounds by replacement or improvements as necessary.
Replacement is necessary due to the age of the equipment, the rising cost of replacement
pieces, and safety concerns.
Community
Services Parks 30322230.
80100 18009 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
600 Live
Oak Avenue
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Ongoing 2020 2021 Grant Yes
New
Revenues
$177k grant
funded; balance
General Fund
$ 230,000 $ 230,000 Prop 68 Per Capita Funding. Moved from
FYE 20. Moved from FYE 21.
Budget
Adopted
Playground
Equipment
Replacement ‐
Oak Manor
Replacement of this equipment is necessary, due to the age and high usage of this
equipment, as well as safety concerns. Staff will be seeking grant funds to assist with the
cost.
Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80220 18010 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
500 Oak
Manor
Drive
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2022 2023 Grant No
New
Revenues
Seeking grant
funding. $ 100,000 $ 100,000
Staff applied for Prop 68 funds for park
renovations including new playground
equipment. Awards have not been
announced.
Reviewed
Softball Fields
Restroom
Concession
Building Roof
Replacement
Replace roof at softball fields Community
Services Parks 30122210.
80220 18110 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
901 River
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2020 2021 TBD No
New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $ ‐
Prioritization and funding source(s) under
review. Roof currently has some leakage
and panels are pealing up. Staff is
currently evaluating the project.
Reviewed
Museum
Exterior Painting
Museum exterior is in need of painting to ensure on‐going protection of the wood surface.
According to staff it has been close to ten years since last exterior painting. Major benefits
include the protection of a major City asset and the maintaining of the beauty of the building
for the public.
Community
Services Museum 10022700.
80220 18023 N/A
David
Burton
dburton@cityof
ukiah.com
431 South
Main Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Deferred 2022 2023 TBD No
New
Revenues
Seek funding
assistance. $ 35,000 $ 35,000 Seek alternate funding. Moved from FYE
21.Reviewed
Security
Cameras at
Museum
Outdoor security cameras for protection of property.Community
Services Museum 10022700.
80220 18111 N/A Neil Davis
ndavis@cityofu
kiah.com
431 South
Main Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Deferred 2022 2023 TBD No
New
Revenues
Seek funding
assistance. $ 20,000 $ 20,000
Seek alternate funding. Budget moved
from FYE 21, and increased from $14k.
Moved from FYE 22 due to higher
priorities in FYE 22.
Reviewed
New HVAC for
Sun House Current HVAC is 30 years old, failing beyond repair, and needs to be replaced.Community
Services Museum 10022700.
80220 TBD N/A
David
Burton
dburton@cityof
ukiah.com
431 South
Main Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022
Grant
Funded No New
Revenues
Seek funding
assistance. $ 45,000 $ 45,000
Unit was repaired in March 2020. It was
advised that it may no longer be
repairable and to begin budgeting for a
new unit. Cost shown is rough budget,
and will work to be more refined.
Reviewed
Conference
Center Exterior
Painting
Building exterior needs painting Community
Services
Ukiah Valley
Conference
Center
73022600.
80220 18112 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
200 South
School
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2024 2025 Enterprise No
New
Revenues $ 45,000 $ 45,000
Funding not secured, planning for routine
maintenance. Moved from FYE 21.
Moved from FYE 23.
Reviewed
Conference
Center Floor
Repair
Lobby tiles are loose and missing, becoming a safety hazard, need to be replaced.Community
Services
Ukiah Valley
Conference
Center
73022600.
80220 18113 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
200 South
School
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Deferred 2024 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 15,000 $ 15,000
A lime intrusion has lifted tiles from
conference center foyer. Moved from
FYE 20 due to COVID‐19. Moved from FYE
22 due to COVID‐19.
Reviewed
Conference
Center Security
Cameras
Install new security cameras inside and outside the building.Community
Services
Ukiah Valley
Conference
Center
73022600.
80220 18114 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
200 South
School
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2024 2025 Enterprise No
New
Revenues $ 100,000 $ 100,000
Looking for funding. Split out cameras as
it's own project. Moved from FYE 23 due
to COVID‐19.
Reviewed
Conference
Center Security Security keyless door lock entry.Community
Services
Ukiah Valley
Conference
Center
73022600.
80220 18189 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
200 South
School
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2024 2025 Enterprise No
New
Revenues $ 30,000 $ 30,000
Recent theft and safety concerns. Split
out the cardlock from the cameras.
Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19.
Reviewed
Conference
Center
Bathroom
Repair
Replace bathroom counter tops and sinks.Community
Services
Ukiah Valley
Conference
Center
73022600.
80220 TBD N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
200 South
School
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2024 2025 Enterprise No
New
Revenues $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
1,044,257$ 3,121,238$ 285,000$ 875,000$ 215,000$ ‐$ 4,496,238$
ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPARTMENT
SUB‐TOTAL:
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Electric Utility
Service Center ‐
Remodel &
Facility
Improvements
Provides offices and warehouse facilities for the Electric Utility Dept.to better serve the
community. Currently offices are located in 40 year old temporary modular buildings with no
foundation. The electrical construction and maintenance materials are stored in an
uninsulated unsealed tin building.
Electric Utility
Department Administration 80126100.
80220 17023 N/A
Diann
Lucchetti
dlucchetti@city
ofukiah.com
1350
Hastings
Road
Facilities/
Buildings/Land
In
Progress 2017 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 100,000$ 350,000$ 150,000$ 10,000$ $ 510,000
Expanded scope including re‐roof task.
Reduced FYE 20 by $1.550 mil and moved
into FYE 21. Project is currently out to
bid. Increased FYE 22 from $120k, and
FYE 23 from $30k.
Reviewed
and
Supported
Renewable
Resource
Development ‐
Solar
Renewable energy development for the Utility’s resource portfolio in meeting the States
green energy mandates.
Electric Utility
Department Administration 80126100.
80220 ECC01 N/A Mel Grandi
mgrandi@cityof
ukiah.com
1350
Hasting
Road
Facilities/
Buildings/Land
In
Progress 2018 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 55,000$ 700,000$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ 50,000$ $ 2,750,000
Rebudgeted to insure replacement
roofing system meets building, solar and
grading requirements. Moved $1.2 mil
out of FYE 20, and moved into FYE 21.
Increased FYE 22 and FYE 24 from $50k,
reduced FYE 25 from $1 mil.
Reviewed
and
Supported
Hydroelectric
Plant
Warehouse,
Shop and
Restroom
Needed to store hydro specialized plant materials, spare parts, provides staff workspace and
restroom/sink facilities.
Electric Utility
Department
Technical
Services
80126100.
80230 18038 N/A
James
O'Brien
jobrien@cityofu
kiah.com
1229 Lake
Mendocino
Drive
Facilities/
Buildings/Land
In
Progress 2018 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 190,000$ $ 190,000 Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Substation Site
Development
Evaluate the need and sites available to construct a future electrical substation to serve
future loads based on planning forecasts of the City's growth.
Electric Utility
Department
Technical
Services
80126100.
80230 18046 N/A Mel Grandi
mgrandi@cityof
ukiah.com TBD Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2020 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 20,000$ 300,000$ $ 320,000 $20k moved from FYE 21, and $300k
from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19.Reviewed
Division CommentsTotals City Council
Status
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l CommentsPr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
Project Name Project Description Department
Org/Object Costs to date
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 2
Page 459 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
Material
Storage Yard Purchase of land for material storage yard. Electric Utility
Department Administration 80126100.
80210 18263 N/A Mel Grandi
mgrandi@cityof
ukiah.com TBD Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 150,000$ $ 150,000 Reviewed
155,000$ 1,410,000$ 1,450,000$ 1,010,000$ 50,000$ ‐$ 3,920,000$ SUB‐TOTAL:
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Card Lock Phase
II
The Police Department is in need of providing a more controlled, secure environment for
their officers and employees. Card lock provides access security to all entrances and exits
using key fobs and access cards. This is already installed in the Civic Center and Annex and is
providing a high level of access security. This would provide additional Public Safety as well.
Finance IT
20822500.
80220 15019 N/A
Ryan
Burkhart
rburkhart@city
ofukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Deferred 2021 2022
Internal
Service No Current
Revenues $ 85,000 $ 85,000
This would be an expansion to the
existing Card Lock system. Moved from
FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Reviewed
‐$ 85,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 85,000$ SUB‐TOTAL:
Totals Comments
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateProject
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
City Council
Status
FIRE AUTHORITY
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Fire Station
Upgrades and
Retrofit
The Fire Stations are in dire need of an upgrade. At the South Station (due to the building's
layout and size), UVFA has currently outgrown the living space. The station needs to include
additional bedrooms, a bathroom with an extra shower, office space, and installing security
measures to protect the facility and fire equipment. This upgrade will maintain the building's
footprint utilizing a change in layout to accommodate the Department's current and future
needs. It will also comply with the current fire code by installing a sprinkler system. The
North Station is also in need of improvements to the grounds and security of the station.
The driveway and pad require repair, which would reduce the impact on department
equipment.
Fire Authority City/District TBD TBD N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
Street/141
Lovers Lane
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022 TBD No
New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $ ‐
Prioritization and funding source(s) under
review; Need to explore grant funding;
Department estimate/request is
$250,000; Additional evaluation of North
Station Location is needed prior to
expending substantial funding on existing
location.
Reviewed
Emergency
Standby
Generators
This project will include placing two external generators with automatic transfer capabilities
at the North and South Stations. The project also includes updates to the current electrical
system and panels to integrate the building's generators. These generators will allow for
power at the stations during an emergency or planned power outage. The facilities must be
able to operate and carry out the Authority's mission regardless of outsideinfluences,
making both stations self‐sufficient. As planned power outages are expected to continue for
the foreseeable future, along with sporadic emergency outages, the Authority must maintain
power for critical infrastructure needed to complete our mission.
Fire Authority City/District TBD TBD N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
Street/141
Lovers Lane
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022 TBD No
New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $ ‐
Prioritization and funding source(s) under
review; Need to explore grant funding.
Department estimate/request is
$120,000
Reviewed
‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
City Council
Status
SUB‐TOTAL:
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
Totals Comments
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
HVAC Upgrade ‐
Garage
The garage's heating and air is inefficient, old and needs to be upgraded. An upgrade will
provide economical benefits in energy savings.Public Works Corporation
Yard
20824300.
80220 18018 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Facilities/
Buildings/Land Deferred 2020 2023
Internal
Service Yes Internal
Service $ 52,000 $ 52,000
Look for alternative energy sources as
part of the consideration of this project.
Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Reviewed
Corporation
Yard
Rehabilitation
Conduct a needs assessment to determine the best and most effective way to rehabilitate
the Corporation Yard for the Water, Sewer, Street and Fleet Maintenance.Public Works Corporation
Yard
20824300.
80220 18190 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022
Internal
Service Yes New
Revenues $ 50,000 $ 50,000
Needs Assessment for Corp Yard Facility
Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Moved from FYE 23.
Reviewed
‐$ 50,000$ 52,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 102,000$
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
City Council
Status
Funding
Type
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
CommentsProject
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
TotalsFunding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date
SUB‐TOTAL:
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Upgrade HVAC
Units on
Buildings ‐
WWTP
Upgrade HVAC units in Operations and Equipment Buildings due to parts being unavailable.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
56120 18129 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Reviewed
Machinery
Storage Cover Install a machinery cover area to protect equipment from weather.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80220 18256 N/A Alan Hodge
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Reviewed
Upgrade HVAC
Units on
Buildings ‐ WTP
Due to aging infrastructure upgrades are needed to the HVAC system at the Water
Treatment Plant
Water
Resources
Water
Treatment Plant
82027113.
56120 TBD N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
935 River
Street
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 70,000 $ 70,000 Reviewed
Well 3
Improvements Improve Well 3 building enclosure.Water
Resources
Water
Treatment Plant
82027113.
80220 TBD N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com
Vichy
Springs
Road
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2025 2026 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Reviewed
‐$ 165,000$ 70,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 150,000$ 385,000$
1,199,257$ 4,831,238$ 1,857,000$ 1,885,000$ 265,000$ 150,000$ 8,988,238$
SUB‐TOTAL:
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateAllocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
StatusProject Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
TOTALS FOR FACILITIES/BUILDINGS/LAND :
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 3
Page 460 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Core ‐ 4 Cisco
3750 Switches ‐
End of Life ‐
Replacements
These switches are the center core of our network infrastructure. They serve as data
conduits for all City of Ukiah operations. They are nearing end‐of‐life, as warranty and
support runs out during this time‐frame.
Finance IT
20913900.
80100 17044 N/A
Ryan
Burkhart
rburkhart@city
ofukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Information
Technology New 2019 2023
Internal
Service Yes Current
Revenues $ 54,399 $ 100,000 $ 100,000
Cisco extended the warranty of two of
the switches, so the cost ended up much
lower than originally anticipated. Costs
to date reflect encumbered funds.
Reviewed
Redundant
Internet
Gateway (Fall‐
over Load
Balancer)
Our current AT&T Internet gateway provides service to all of the City of Ukiah departments
for Internet access, as well as Public Safety access to law enforcement websites and other
important services. If service fails, we do not have a failover scenario in place. A failover
scenario would involve an additional Internet Gateway with a different Internet service
provider (ISP). If one ISP fails, the gateway would failover to the alternate one available.
This would ensure service availability, virtually 100% of the time.
Finance IT
20913900.
80100 17046 N/A
Ryan
Burkhart
rburkhart@city
ofukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Information
Technology New 2021 2023
Internal
Service Yes Current
Revenues $ 83,400 $ 24,200 $ 107,600
Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Reduced FYE 22 amount from $166,800,
and FYE 23 from $48,400.
Reviewed
Dell Compellent
Storage ‐ 5 year
cyclic end of life
replacement
The Dell Compellent Storage serves as our main live data storage for the CityofUkiah. Itis
used in conjunction with our four Virtual Machine Hosts, which control and offer resources
to all of our virtual servers. This basically contains the majority of our production servers
upon which all City of Ukiah data services reside. In addition, our VMM (Virtual Machine
Manager) server operates as stated. It manages all of the virtual servers within the
infrastructure. Dell‐4 VM Hosts & Virtual Machine Manager Server ‐ 5 year cyclic ‐ end of life
‐ replacement (Refinance)) $290,000 at approximately $59,000/year x 5 years.
Finance IT
20913900.
80100 17047 N/A
Ryan
Burkhart
rburkhart@city
ofukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Information
Technology On‐going 2021 2026
Internal
Service No Current
Revenues $ 59,000 $ 59,000 $ 59,000 $ 59,000 $ 236,000
Department is exploring cloud storage
solution where a portion of this may not
be necessary. Added financing through
FYE 26. Moved to begin in FYE 23 as
project continues to be reviewed.
Reviewed
Cisco Access
Switch EOL
Replacement
These switches connect the City's computers, phones, printers, and Wi‐Fi units into the core
infrastructure. The switches allow these devices to connect to the Internet and internal
servers. They will be End‐Of‐Life and will no longer be supported by the manufacture.
Finance IT
20913800.
80100 18100 N/A
Ryan
Burkhart
rburkhart@city
ofukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Information
Technology New 2022 2023
Internal
Service No Current
Revenues $ 180,000 $ 180,000 Reviewed
Cisco Nexus
Switch EOL
Replacement
These switches are the center core of our network infrastructure. They serve as data
conduits for all City of Ukiah operations. They will be end‐of‐life, as warranty and support
runs out during this time‐frame.
Finance IT
20913900.
80100 TBD N/A
Ryan
Burkhart
rburkhart@city
ofukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Information
Technology New 2024 2025
Internal
Service No Current
Revenues $ 110,000 $ 110,000 Reviewed
54,399$ 83,400$ 363,200$ 59,000$ 169,000$ 59,000$ 733,600$
FIRE AUTHORITY
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
SUB‐TOTAL:
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateAllocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Mobile Data
Terminals (MDT)
The Ukiah Valley Fire Authority has begun to modernize utilizing wireless data through
Mobile Data Terminals (MDT) to enhance safety, reduce repetitive radio communications,
and access live up‐to‐date data. In an ever‐changing environment in Fire Operations, the
need for mobile field data rises; these units will allow us to track and send out information
vital to the success of our mission. This equipment also allows us to have real‐time data on
the location of units to allow for a safer environment for our team members.Additionally,
these units will tie into the CalFire system allowing for better, faster, and more reliable
information to be passed between agencies in the field. The Terminals use Mobile Wireless,
GPS, & Satellite communications allowing for increased situational awareness in severe
operational environments.
Fire Authority City Fire Multiple 18271 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Information
Technology New 2021 2022 General Yes
Current
Revenues $ 121,800 $ 121,800 Funds to be used are 710, 100, 915 and
917.Reviewed
‐$ 121,800$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 121,800$ SUB‐TOTAL:
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Mobile
Computer
Terminals and
Wireless
Routers
Replacement
The Ukiah Police Department has utilized Mobile Computer Terminals within Police vehicles
since 2006, to reduce radio communications and provide officers with access to enhanced
data. As reporting requirements increase and the need for field data entries rise the need for
this technology will increase as well. The Mobile Computer Terminals use a Mobile Wireless
Router to transmit and receive information including video and audio recordings captured by
the vehicle mounted cameras. The hardware and operating system currently in use were
deployed in 2015 and is at end of life and unsupported, failing more often, requiring
increased down time for repairs.
Police Police
10020210.
54330 18258 N/A
Justin
Wyatt
jwyatt@cityofu
kiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Information
Technology New 2021 2022 General Yes
Current
Revenues
Grant funding
may be available. $ 85,000 $ 85,000
Moved from FYE 23 due to failing
equipment, and reduced amount from
$125k.
Reviewed
‐$ 85,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 85,000$
54,399$ 290,200$ 363,200$ 59,000$ 169,000$ 59,000$ 940,400$
INFRASTRUCTURE
AIRPORT
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year City Council
Status
SUB‐TOTAL:
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date Totals Comments
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
TOTALS FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY :
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Runway 15‐33
Pavement
Reduction
(Construction
Phase 2)
Runway 15‐33 is currently 4,423 feet long and 150 feet wide. The project will reduce width
to 75 feet. New pavement marking will be applied. New LED runway lighting will be
installed, which was formerly identified as PC 18159.
Airport Airport
77825200.
80230 18032 N/A Greg Owen
gowen@cityofu
kiah.com
1403 South
State Street Infrastructure New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
New
Revenues
Contingent upon
FAA Grant
Funding.
$ 1,900,000 $ 1,900,000
The FAA has made cost and project scope
adjustments. 90% FAA Grant, 5%
Caltrans. Moved from FY 19/20 due to
FAA funding timing. Moved from 20/21.
FAA funding not currently available for
this project.
Budget
Adopted
City Council
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateAllocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name
Improvement
Type
Project
StatusProject Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Totals Comments
Estimated Cost per Fiscal YearProject
Location
Project Contact
Email
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 4
Page 461 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
Pavement
Rehabilitation
of Taxiways A,
A3 and A5 ‐
Design
This project is for the design of Taxiways A (4,540'x55'), A3 (250'x45'), and A5 (250'x45')
pavement rehabilitation assumed to be a crack fill, seal and slurry.Airport Airport
77825200.
80230 18034 N/A Greg Owen
gowen@cityofu
kiah.com
1403 South
State Street Infrastructure New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
New
Revenues
Contingent upon
FAA Grant
Funding.
$ 148,385 $ 148,385
The FAA has made cost and project scope
adjustments. Moved from FY 21/22, and
increased by $88,385.
Reviewed
and
Supported
Pavement
Rehabilitation
of Taxiways A,
A3 and A5 ‐
Construction
This project will cover constructionto rehabilitate pavements of Taxiways A (4,540'x55'), A3 (
250'x45') and A5 (250'x45').Airport Airport
77825200.
80230 18035 N/A Greg Owen
gowen@cityofu
kiah.com
1403 South
State Street Infrastructure New 2024 2025 Enterprise Yes
New
Revenues
Contingent upon
FAA Grant
Funding.
$ 1,339,200 $ 1,339,200
The FAA has made cost and project scope
adjustments. Moved from FY 22/23, and
increased by $839,200.
Reviewed
and
Supported
‐$ 1,900,000$ 148,385$ ‐$ 1,339,200$ ‐$ 3,387,585$
ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPARTMENT
SUB‐TOTAL:
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Upgrade fish
hatchery pumps
and controls
(Hydro)
Control upgrades to provide expanded abilities: 1. Remote control and monitoring from the
Fish Hatchery and 2. Emergency station light and power backup to the hydro plant.
Electric Utility
Department
Technical
Services
80126100.
80230 18037 N/A
James
O'Brien
jobrien@cityofu
kiah.com
1229 Lake
Mendocino
Drive
Infrastructure New 2020 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 200,000$ $ 200,000 Budget
Adopted
Automate Statio
n Light & Power,
Pump
& Generator
Controls (Hydro)
Hydro Plant control and power upgrades to automate emergency station light and power
and hatchery backup pumps.
Electric Utility
Department
Technical
Services
80126100.
80230 18118 N/A
James
O'Brien
jobrien@cityofu
kiah.com
1229 Lake
Mendocino
Drive
Infrastructure New 2020 2021 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 120,000$ $ 120,000 Moved from FYE 21, and increased from
$80k.
Budget
Adopted
Community
Power
Management
Projects
Power pedestal replacement program goals includes reducing energy loss,improve
lighting/access control, safety and availability of power in public places.Includes charging
stations and power pedestals.
Electric Utility
Department Administration 80126100.
80230 18040 N/A
Cindy
Sauers
csauers@cityof
ukiah.com
Ukiah
Electric
System
Infrastructure On‐going 2018 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 60,000$ 60,000$ $ 60,000
Rebudgeted to reflect workforce
scheduling allocation due to the Oak
Manor Undergrounding project.
Budget
Adopted
Fairgrounds
4160 to 12,000
volt Conversion
Replaces existing low voltage (4160V) system with 12,000 Volt primary rated cable and
transformers and secondary conductor. Fairgrounds to provide USERC specified metering
and underground duct. Removes existing low voltage (4160V) system.
Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80230 18041 N/A
Cindy
Sauers
csauers@cityof
ukiah.com
Ukiah
Electric
System
Infrastructure In
Progress 2019 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 60,000$ 150,000$ 150,000$ 75,000$ $ 375,000
Rebudgeted to reflect workforce
scheduling allocation due to the Oak
Manor Undergrounding project. Reduced
amount for FYE 20 by $120k, and
changed funding in FYE 22 & 23. Moved
forward by 1 year, project completing
23/24.
Budget
Adopted
Substation and
Hydroelectric
Plant Control,
Protection and
Communication
Systems
Replacement
Replace the Mendocino Hydro control, protection and communication systems hardware,
program and coding for hydro specific automation control. The existing systems are
outdated with limited after‐market support and no new replacement part availability.
Electric Utility
Department
Technical
Services
80126100.
80230 18042 N/A
James
O'Brien
jobrien@cityofu
kiah.com
1229 Lake
Mendocino
Drive
Infrastructure In
Progress 2017 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 30,000$ 25,000$ 80,000$ $ 105,000
Reduced amount in FYE 20 by $105k,
added funding in FYE 21 & 22. Increased
FYE 21 from $175k. Engineering
complete, installation to start 3/2021.
Budget
Adopted
Underground
Capital System
Improvements
(<$50,000 each)
Transformer replacement and upgrades, wood pole testing and replacement, system
capacity improvements and protection, control, monitoring and communication
enhancements.
Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80230 18043 N/A
Cindy
Sauers
csauers@cityof
ukiah.com
Ukiah
Electric
System
Infrastructure On‐going 2018 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 100,000$ 230,000$ 235,000$ 235,000$ 235,000$ $ 935,000 Budget
Adopted
Overhead
Capital System
Improvements
(<$50,000 each)
Transformer replacement and upgrades, system capacity improvements and protection,
control, monitoring and Communication enhancements.
Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80230 18044 N/A
Cindy
Sauers
csauers@cityof
ukiah.com
Ukiah
Electric
System
Infrastructure On‐going 2018 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 310,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ 250,000$ $ 1,000,000
Reduced FYE 20 by $140k, and reduced
all future years to $250k/yr. Increased
FYE 21 from $250k.
Budget
Adopted
Governor speed
control & Valve
Upgrades
(Hydro)
Upgrades to the governor sensing, controller and feedback transducers to improve
performance and reliability. Existing governor controls frequently are out of service due to
failure or adjustment.
Electric Utility
Department
Technical
Services
80126100.
80230 18047 N/A
James
O'Brien
jobrien@cityofu
kiah.com
1229 Lake
Mendocino
Drive
Infrastructure New 2020 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 350,000$ $ 350,000
Moved from beginning FYE 21 due to
COVID‐19. Project was spread between
FYE 22 and FYE 23. Combined into FYE 22
and reduced by $30k.
Reviewed
Oak Manor
Dr. Overhead to
Underground
Conversion
Install cable and associated equipment for replacing the overhead facilities Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80230 18121 N/A
Scott
Bozzoli
sbozzoli@cityof
ukiah.com
Oak Manor
Dr.Infrastructure New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 200,000$ $ 200,000 Reduced amount from $500k, moved
from FYE 21. Moved from FYE 22.Reviewed
Policy and
Legislated
System
Modifications
System design, equipment and installation to conform to mandated industry standards.
Proposed fire mitigation requirements require selected equipment to be replaced or
protected to reduce fire risk.
Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80230 18124 N/A
Cindy
Sauers
csauers@cityof
ukiah.com Various Infrastructure New 2019 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ 100,000$ $ 400,000 Reduced amount for FYE 20 from $80k,
and amounts from $200k FYE 22 onward.
Budget
Adopted
Hydroelectric
Plant Transfer
Trip Upgrade
Upgrade existing and provide redundancy for Hydro transfer trip circuit Electric Utility
Department
Technical
Services
80126100.
80230 18125 N/A
James
O'Brien
jobrien@cityofu
kiah.com Hydro Plant Infrastructure New 2019 2020 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 3,000$ 195,000$ $ 195,000
Reduced amount for FYE 20 from $225k,
and added funds to FYE 21. Moved from
FYE 21.
Reviewed
State St.
Underground
Phase II, District
5: Overhead to
Underground
Relocates or underground overhead electric, phone and cable TV utilities ‐ Henry to Norton,
Mill to Gobbi.
Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80230 18259 N/A
Cindy
Sauers
csauers@cityof
ukiah.com State Street Infrastructure New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 35,000$ 850,000$ $ 885,000 Reviewed
Fire Mitigation
Grant Matching
Matching 25% funds for FEMA HMG for fire mitigation undergrounding, vegetation
management and design services. Electric equipment and wire.
Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80230 18260 N/A
Cindy
Sauers
csauers@cityof
ukiah.com
Clay St.,
Standley
St., Park
Blvd.,
Barnes and
Infrastructure New 2021 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 200,000$ 400,000$ 200,000$ 50,000$ $ 850,000 Reviewed
563,000$ 1,890,000$ 2,210,000$ 940,000$ 635,000$ ‐$ 5,675,000$
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Project
Number
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
City Council
Status
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date Totals Comments
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
SUB‐TOTAL:
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 5
Page 462 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Corporation
Yard
Remediation
System Removal
This project will remove the Underground Storage Tank cleanup equipment. Public Works
Corporation
Yard
20824300.
52100 18261 N/A Dave Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Infrastructure New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes Insurance $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Reviewed
Corporation
Yard Security This project will improve security in order to prevent further break‐ins and theft. Public Works
Corporation
Yard
20824300.
80230 TBD N/A Dave Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Infrastructure New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes Current
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $ ‐
Prioritization and funding source(s) under
review. Department estimate/request is
$100,000
Reviewed
Corporation
Yard
Rehabilitation
This project will upgrade the Corporation Yard Facilities. Public Works Corporation
Yard
20824300.
80230 TBD N/A Dave Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Infrastructure New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes Current
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $ ‐
Prioritization and funding source(s) under
review. Department estimate/request is
$2,500,000 for existing location; Location
evaluation will need to be completed to
determine best long location for the yard
and/or continued use of existing site.
Reviewed
Landfill Closure This project will permanently close the Landfill Disposal site per Federal Mandates. Public Works Landfill
70224500.
80230 18025 N/A Tim Eriksen
teriksen@cityof
ukiah.com
3100 Vichy
Springs
Road
Infrastructure In
Progress 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 10,343,287 $ 10,343,287
Project specifics will require additional
Council review. Moved from FYE 20 to
FYE 21. EIR Litigation in progress.
Construction projected for FYE 22 so
moved from FYE 21.
Budget
Adopted
‐$ 10,493,287$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 10,493,287$
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
SUB‐TOTAL:
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateAllocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Henderson Lane
Water Main
Replacement
Project is needed in order to upgrade a failing water main. This is needed in order to provide
potable water to the Water customers.
Water
Resources
Water
Treatment Plant
82227113.
80230 18051 N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com
Henderson
Lane Infrastructure In
Progress 2018 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 15,800 $ 70,000 $ 70,000
Design Complete. Moved from FYE 20 to
FYE 21 due to COVID‐19. Reduced
amount from $150k.
Budget
Adopted
Water Main
Replacements Plan for water main replacements throughout the City.Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82227113.
80230 18072 N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com Various Infrastructure On‐going 2020 2026 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 6,500,000 Added funding for FYE 25 and FYE 26.
Reduced FYE 22 from $1.5M.
Budget
Adopted
Phase 4
Recycled Water
This project will provide an additional irrigation source for City Parks,Golf Course, Cemetery
and Schools. This will reduce the demand on the potable water system and reduce discharge
to the Russian River
Water
Resources Recycled Water 83027330.
80230 18052 N/A Sean White
swhite@cityofu
kiah.com
Brush
Street to
Golf Course
Infrastructure New 2024 2025 Enterprise Yes
New
Revenues
Will be funded by
grant/loan. $ 43,700 $ 18,500,000 $ 18,500,000
Environmental documentation is
complete. Design began in December,
2018. Modified funding comments to
eliminate a shared cost with Sewer.
Moved budget from FYE 21. Moved from
FYE 22 due to COVID‐19 ‐ feasibility still
under review.
Reviewed
and
Supported
Chlorine
Residual
Valve/Alarm on
Discharge
Engineering and installation. Critical safety valve to monitor the outflow of chlorinated
water into the river.
Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80230 18054 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
300 Plant
Road Infrastructure New 2018 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Rebudgeting. Moved from FYE 20. Reviewed
This project will replace the sewer main on Dora Street from Mill Street to Grove Avenue as
well as all sewer laterals
Sewer
Operations
84427221.
80230 N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com Dora Street Infrastructure New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 400,000
This project will replace the water main on Dora Street from Mill Street to Grove Avenue as
well as all hydrant, valves and service connections
Water
Operations
82227111.
80230 N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com Dora Street Infrastructure New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 800,000
Replace Heat
Exchangers
This project will replace deteriorating heat exchangers for the operationoftheDigesterand
Boilers
Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80230 18131 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
300 Plant
Road Infrastructure New 2023 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Rehabilitation
of Zone 2
Booster Pump
Upgrade the enclosure and electrical components in the structure enclosing the booster
pump for Pressure Zone 2 to increase reliability and security
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82227113.
80230 TBD N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com Golf Course Infrastructure New 2024 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Moved from FYE 23 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Replace Water
Main on Low
Gap Street
Replace the 16 inch steel water main from North State Street to North Bush Street
concurrent with Phase 4 of the Recycled Water Project
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82227113.
80230 TBD N/A Don Brown
dwbrown@city
ofukiah.com
Low Gap
Street Infrastructure New 2024 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Replace Various
Water Mains Replace water mains on Clay Street, Pine Street, Spring Street, etc.Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82227113.
80230 18262 N/A Don Brown
dwbrown@city
ofukiah.com Various Infrastructure New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 400,000 $ 400,000
Removed budget from FYE 21 due to
COVID‐19. Increased budget from $250k
in FYE 22, and eliminated $250k in FYE
23, 24 and 25.
Reviewed
Replace Sewer
Main on Low
Gap Street
Replace the 15 inch and 6 inch sewer main from North State Street to North Bush Street
concurrent with Phase 4 of the Recycled Water Project
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84427222.
80230 TBD N/A Don Brown
dwbrown@city
ofukiah.com
Low Gap
Street Infrastructure New 2024 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Reseal Wash
Water Basins Remove and Replace Seal on Wash Water Basins Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80230 18192 N/A Alan Hodge
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road Infrastructure New 2020 2021 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Moved from FYE 21.Budget
Adopted
Upgrade PLC's Upgrade old Programmable Logic Controls.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80230 TBD N/A Alan Hodge
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road Infrastructure New 2023 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 350,000 $ 350,000
Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19.
Moved from FYE 24, and increased from
$200k.
Reviewed
Sludge Lagoon
Remediation Prepare plans and specifications for the removal of sludge from the sludge lagoon.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80230 18257 N/A Alan Hodge
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Facilities/
Buildings/Land New 2021 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 50,000 $ 400,000 $ 450,000 Reviewed
Recondition
Levees Recondition the levees on the Percolation Ponds.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80230 TBD N/A Alan Hodge
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road Infrastructure New 2024 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Eliminated $200k for 2 prior years due to
COVID‐19. Reviewed
59,500$ 1,210,000$ 3,100,000$ 2,250,000$ 21,600,000$ 1,500,000$ 29,660,000$
622,500$ 15,493,287$ 5,458,385$ 3,190,000$ 23,574,200$ 1,500,000$ 49,215,872$
City Council
Status
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
Dora Street
Utility
Improvement
Project‐ Water
& Sewer
Water
Resources 18127 $ 1,200,000
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date Totals Comments
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
SUB‐TOTAL:
TOTALS FOR INFRASTUCTURE :
Reviewed
Contingent upon rate study. Moved from
FYE 21. Note that rate study based on
happening in FYE 21. Moved from FYE
22.
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 6
Page 463 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
STREETS & RIGHTS‐OF‐WAY
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
12024200.
80230 2022 2023
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues Measure Y $ 2,000,000
50024220.
80230 2022 2023
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues Gas Tax $ 700,000
East Clay Street
Improvement
Project
This project will improve East Clay Street from Main Street to the Railroad Crossing in order
to facilitate the development of the new Courthouse site. This project includes water, sewer,
pedestrian facilities and drainage facilities as well as reconstruction of the street section.
Public Works Engineering
12024200.
80230 18128 No Tim Eriksen
teriksen@cityof
ukiah.com Clay Street Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2024 2025
Special
Revenue No New
Revenues Measure Y $ 750,000 $ 750,000
Introduced and discussed at the January
16, 2019 Council meeting. Moved from
FYE 21. Moved from FYE 23.
Reviewed
Street Striping This will update striping on streets in selected areas. Public Works Engineering
12024200.
52100 18251 N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com
Various
Streets
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way
Complete
d 2019 2026
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues Measure Y $ 50,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 290,000
Ongoing work. Eliminated FYE 21 due to
COVID‐19. Added funding to FYE 25 and
26.
Reviewed
Public Works Engineering
12024200.
80230 Yes Tim Eriksen
teriksen@cityof
ukiah.com
Orr Street
at Orr
Creek
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way
In
Progress 2021 2022
Capital
Projects Yes New
Revenues CDBG Grant $ 150,000
Public Works Engineering
25124220.
80230 Yes Tim Eriksen
teriksen@cityof
ukiah.com
Orr Street
at Orr
Creek
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way
In
Progress 2022 2023
Capital
Projects Yes New
Revenues $ 254,438
Low Gap Road
and North Bush
Street
Roundabout
This project will complete the environmental, ROW, and design phases for a roundabout at
Low Gap Road and N. Bush St. Construction phase not currently funded.Public Works Engineering
50924210.
80230 15024 N/A Tim Eriksen
teriksen@cityof
ukiah.com
Low Gap
Road and N.
Bush St.
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way
In
Progress 2021 2022
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues
$110k Design
Funded,
Construction
Funding Not
Approved.
$ 750,000 $ 750,000
Design authorized, but project requires
additional Council review. Moved from
FYE 22, and reduced from $1.5 mil due
to COVID‐19. Moved from FYE 21.
Budget
Adopted
Slurry Seal
Project This project will improve the Streets network. Public Works Engineering 12024200.
52100 18252 N/A
Daniel
Flores
dflores@cityofu
kiah.com
Various
Streets
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way
Complete
d 2019 2026
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues Measure Y $ 426,000 $ 350,000 $ 400,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 1,500,000
Going out to bid. Budget will be utilizing
FYE 21 anticipated revenue. Had utilized
this year's budget for other projects.
Increased budget from $200k FYE 22.
Increased budget from $400k FYE 21,
from $200k in FYE 23, and from $200k in
FYE 24. Added budget in FYE 25 and 26.
Budget
Adopted
Gobbi/Main
Traffic Signal This project will alleviate traffic for better vehicle flow. Public Works Traffic Signal
50724620.
80230 18073 N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com
Gobbi
Street/
Waugh
Lane
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2022 2023
Special
Revenue No New
Revenues
Will need to apply
for STIP funding. $ 800,000 $ 800,000 Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Main Street
Reconstruction
Project
Reconstruct Main Street, from Gobbi to Mill. Public Works Engineering 12024200.
80230 TBD N/A
Andrew
Stricklin
astricklin@cityo
fukiah.com Main Street Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2022 2023
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues Measure Y $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Clara Avenue
Reconstruction
Project
Reconstruct Clara Avenue, from State to Orchard. Public Works CDBG 12024200.
80230 TBD N/A
Jason
Benson
jbenson@cityof
ukiah.com
Clara
Avenue
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2021 2022 TBD Yes
New
Revenues TBD $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000
Moved from FYE 21. Moved from FYE 22.
Formerly thought to be eligible for CDBG
funding.
Reviewed
Leslie Street
Rehabilitation
Project
Rehabilitate Leslie Street, Gobbi to Perkins. Public Works CDBG
12024200.
80230 TBD N/A
Jason
Benson
jbenson@cityof
ukiah.com Leslie Street Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2022 2023
Grant
Funded Yes New
Revenues
CDBG Funding
Opportunity $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Moved from FYE 21. Reviewed
Perkins Street
Storm Drain and
Widening
Project
This project will add a storm drain on East Perkins Street and widen the intersection at
Orchard Avenue to add another East Bound through lane.Public Works Streets
10024620.
80230 TBD N/A
Andrew
Stricklin
astricklin@cityo
fukiah.com
East Perkins
Street
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2022 2023
Special
Revenue No New
Revenues Measure Y $ 2,277,000 $ 2,277,000 Reviewed
South Ukiah
Rehabilitation
Project
This project will overlay S. Dora Street from Beacon Lane to Washington, and S. State Street
from Beacon Lane to Observatory, including ADA pedestrian improvements.Public Works Streets
12024200.
80230 18254 N/A
Andrew
Stricklin
astricklin@cityo
fukiah.com Dora/State Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2021 2022
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues Measure Y $ 2,200,000 $ 2,200,000 Reviewed
Great Redwood
Trail‐ Phase 4 This project will extend the Great Redwood Trail from Commerce Drive to Norgard Lane Public Works Engineering
51124210.
80230 18253 N/A
Jason
Benson
jbenson@cityof
ukiah.com
Railroad
ROW
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2021 2023
Grant
Funded Yes New
Revenues
Urban Greening
Grant $ 3,563,212 $ 3,563,212 Grant has been awarded. Moved full
project for completion in FYE 22.Reviewed
Great Redwood
Trail‐ Phase 5 This project will extend the Great Redwood Trail from Brush Street to Hensley Creek Road Public Works Engineering TBD TBD N/A
Jason
Benson
jbenson@cityof
ukiah.com
Railroad
ROW
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2022 2024
Grant
Funded No New
Revenues
Urban Greening
Grant $ 275,000 $ 8,000,000 $ 8,275,000 Reviewed
Gobbi Street
Reconstruction
Reconstruct Gobbi Street in 2 separate projects (US101 to State Street) and (State Street to
Dora Street)Public Works Engineering
12024200.
80230 TBD N/A
Andrew
Stricklin
astricklin@cityo
fukiah.com
Gobbi
Street
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2023 2024
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues Measure Y $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Reviewed
Hastings/Airport
Road
Alternative
Transportation
Route
Public Works Engineering will analyze and develop a conceptual plan for an alternative
transportation route and/or mitigation measures for Hastings/Airport Rd north of the Ukiah
Municipal Airport in an effort to accommodate a future runway extension to 5,000 feet.
The expanded runway alternative will be evaluated during the review and update of the
airport land use plan (ALP) and is an important step to ensure the Ukiah Airport is prepared
to accommodate future aviation needs of the region including fire service.
Public Works Engineering N/A TBD N/A Tim Eriksen
teriksen@cityof
ukiah.com
Hastings/Ai
rport Road
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2021 2022 N/A Yes
Current
Revenues N/A $ ‐
FYE 22 project ‐ no budget impact as the
work will be done by in‐house
engineering staff.
Reviewed
Airport Park
Blvd South
Extension
Public Works Engineering will analyze and develop a conceptual plan for a south extension of
Airport Park Blvd. out of the Redwood Business Park and connecting to southern Ukiah
transportation infrastructure.
Public Works Engineering N/A TBD N/A Tim Eriksen
teriksen@cityof
ukiah.com
Airport Park
Blvd
Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New 2022 2023 N/A Yes
Current
Revenues N/A $ ‐
FYE 23 project ‐ no budget impact as the
work will be done by in‐house
engineering staff.
Reviewed
426,000$ 7,063,212$ 8,766,438$ 9,810,000$ 1,060,000$ 2,310,000$ 29,009,650$
426,000$ 7,063,212$ 8,766,438$ 9,810,000$ 1,060,000$ 2,310,000$ 29,009,650$
Project Name Project Description Department Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date
Estimated Cost per Fiscal YearProject
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
StatusDivision
Moved from FYE 21, and added $700k to
Measure Y cost. Moved from FYE 22.ReviewedJarod Thiele jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com Dora Street Streets & Rights‐
of‐Way New $ 2,700,000
Dora Street
Utility
Improvement
Project
This project will replace the water main, sewer main and reconstruct the street on Dora
Street from Mill Street to Grove Avenue.Public Works Engineering 18127 Yes
SUB‐TOTAL:
TOTALS FOR STREETS & RIGHTS‐OF‐WAY :
Orr Street
Bridge This project will improve the bridge on Orr Street at Orr Creek. 18065 $ 404,438
The City has received $150k to fund a
planning study for Orr Street Bridge and
the Orr Street transportation corridor.
Activities include completion of a study
to analyze existing conditions of the
street, including the transportation
corridor and bridge, as well as the
completion of a plan and preparation of
plans and specifications and an
Engineer's Cost Estimate to be used for a
future public improvement project.
Reviewed
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 7
Page 464 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
AIRPORT
VEHICLES, MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Replace 20,000
gallon fuel tank
with 20,000
gallon Jet A tank
Current tank is a split fuel system, containing both Jet A fuel and Avgas. Conversion to Jet A
is necessary to maximize the fuel sources for the airport, and provide better service to its
customers.Airport Airport
77925200.
80100 15042 N/A Greg Owen
gowen@cityofu
kiah.com
1411 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
In
Progress 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 150,000 $ 150,000
Moved from FYE 20. Current revenues
may not be adequate, external funding
may be necessary.
Reviewed
Water Tender ‐
Shared Cost
Current tank is a split fuel system, containing both Jet A fuel and Avgas. Conversion to Jet A
is necessary to maximize the fuel sources for the airport, and provide better service to its
customers.Airport Airport
77925200.
80100 V2543
Shared with
100 Parks,
100 Streets,
820 Water,
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
Deferred 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 10,000 $ 10,000
Spent over $15k this past year for rental
of a unit. Moved from FYE 22. If new
Fire Tender is approved for FYE 22, the
replaced unit will become available for
other City departments, and this item will
then be eliminated.
Reviewed
‐$ 150,000$ 10,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 160,000$
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
SUB‐TOTAL:
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateAllocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
TypeProject Description
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r Estimated Cost per Fiscal YearProject
StatusProject Name
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Replacement
Truck Replacement of vehicles that are no longer cost effective to repair.Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80100 V737 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 General No
Current
Revenues $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Moved to FYE 22. Moved to FYE 23. Reviewed
Replacement
Truck Replacement of vehicles that are no longer cost effective to repair.Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80100 18066 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 General No
Current
Revenues $ 55,000 $ 55,000 Moved to FYE 24 Reviewed
Replacement
Truck‐ Building
Maintenance
Replacement truck is necessary Community
Services
Building
Maintenance
20822500.
80100 V2642 N/A
Kerry
Randall
krandall@cityof
ukiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
Deferred 2022 2023 General No Reserves $ 48,000 $ 48,000 Moved to FYE 22. Moved to FYE 23. Reviewed
Bucket Truck
Replacement ‐
Shared Cost
There are currently two bucket trucks, Vehicle #2221, a 1992 Ford F450 which is being put
into surplus in fiscal year 2017/2018, and Vehicle #2230, a 1995 Ford F450, which will be kept
into service until it is replaced. It is used to trim street and park trees, and also assists in
hanging banners which promote City services and activities which benefit the community.
Two divisions share the cost: $100,000 total
Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80100 V2224 Shared with
100 Streets David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
Deferred 2022 2023 General No
Current
Revenues $ 55,000 $ 55,000 Look to match replacement with surplus
from Electric Utility. Moved to FYE 23.Reviewed
Water Tender ‐
Shared Cost
The current water tender no longer meets emission standards and is inoperable. Will be
used to water street trees, Riverside Park, fill Vactor trucks and be available to support
mowing and Fire operations. Five divisions share the cost: $150,000 total
Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80100 TBD
Shared with
100 Streets,
779 Airport,
820 Water,
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
Deferred 2022 2023 Enterprise No
Current
Revenues $ 10,000 $ 10,000
Reduced amount from $10k to split cost
with Airport based on anticipated use.
Spent over $15k this past year for rental
of a unit. Moved from FYE 21 due to
COVID‐19. Moved from FYE 22. If new
Fire Tender is approved for FYE 22, the
replaced unit will become available for
other City departments, and this item will
then be eliminated.
Reviewed
Parks Service
Vehicle EV/Low Fuel/Hybrid Vehicle(s) for Service of Park Facilities.Community
Services Parks 10022100.
80100 V3765 N/A
Jarrod
Meyer
jmeyer@cityofu
kiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 General Yes
Current
Revenues $ 40,000 $ 40,000
Increasing park acreage requires increase
in Park staffing, which will also require an
additional vehicle.
Reviewed
Generator
Installation at
the Ukiah Valley
Conference
Center
Generator for the Ukiah Valley Conference Center.Community
Services
Conference
Center
73022600.
80100
18265
/1826
6
N/A Mel Grandi
mgrandi@cityof
ukiah.com
411 West
Clay Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 CDBG Yes
New
Revenues Grant funds. $ 120,845 $ 120,845 Reviewed
Ice Skating Rink
Purchase of materials and supplies necessary to build a 40' x 100' ice skating rink. Will
include rink floor, all piping & hoses, dasherboards, access gates, board anchors, Ice Wizard
resurfacer, gas powered edger, 300 pairs of rental skates, ice skate sharpener, 95 black
rubber mats, vapor barrier, 500 gallons of glycol, ice skate racks and all other necessary ice
tools. Chiller and tent would be rented annually. The cost of this purchase is less than the
cost of renting the same materials for 2 years.
Community
Services Ice Rink 31422860.
80100 18193 N/A
Jake
Burgess
jburgess@cityof
ukiah.com
411 West
Clay Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 150,000 $ 150,000
Purchase will has a positive rate of return
within two years. Moved from FYE 21 due
to COVID‐19. Moved from FYE 22.
Reviewed
‐$ 160,845$ 303,000$ 55,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 518,845$
CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
City Council
Status
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date Totals Comments
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
SUB‐TOTAL:
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Parking Meter
Replacement Replacing parking meters. City Manager
Economic
Development
64012600.
80230 18165 N/A Traci Boyl
tboyl@cityofuki
ah.com Downtown
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
Deferred 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 400,000$ $ 400,000
Funded by line of credit loan proceeds
being secured by Finance as part of a
larger capital improvement funding
strategy. Moved from FYE 20 year.
Installation will coincide with Streetscape
Project. Funding secured through bond
issuance; project put on hold due to
COVID‐19 and will resume when market
conditions allow. Moved from FYE 21.
Budget
Adopted
‐$ 400,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 400,000$
Project Name Project Description Department Division
Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type Comments City Council
StatusTotals
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
SUB‐TOTAL:
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 8
Page 465 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
ELECTRIC UTILITY DEPARTMENT
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Electric Meter
Replacements
Electric Meter Replacement and cloud based data management system improving customer
access to outage information, usage data and provide customer selectable notifications.
Electric Utility
Department
Technical
Services
80126100.
80100 15080 N/A
Cindy
Sauers
csauers@cityof
ukiah.com ah Electric Sys
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
In
Progress 2018 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 1,000$ 500,000$ 2,000,000$ $ 2,500,000 Currently in the planning stage. Moved
from starting FYE 21.
Budget
Adopted
Lift Replaces a high capacity fork lift due to 1. Air quality standards to update/improve engine
emissions and 2. Due to the equipment’s condition and age.
Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80100 E1721 N/A Tim Santo
tsanto@cityofu
kiah.com N/A
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 125,000$ $ 125,000 Moved to FYE 22. Increased amount
from $70k.Reviewed
Utility/Inspector
Truck Replaces 2003 F250 with EV Truck Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80100 TBD N/A Tim Santo
tsanto@cityofu
kiah.com N/A
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 90,000$ $ 90,000
EV options will hit market in FYE 21/22;
Planned for FYE 22/23 to ensure quality
of vehicle outside of 1st Generation
models.
Reviewed
Trouble Truck Replaces V2233 Ford F‐550 AT40‐G Articulating Telescopic Aerial Lift Super cab.Electric Utility
Department Distribution 80126100.
80100 TBD N/A Tim Santo
tsanto@cityofu
kiah.com N/A
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2024 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues 200,000$ $ 200,000 Reviewed
1,000$ 625,000$ 2,090,000$ 200,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 2,915,000$
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
SUB‐TOTAL:
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateAllocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Truck ‐ Utility
Service
Attendant
Current vehicle approaching the end of it's useful life. Finance Utility Billing
20513300.
80100 TBD N/A Lori Martin
lmartin@cityofu
kiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023
Internal
Service No New
Revenues $ 35,000 $ 35,000 Reviewed
‐$ ‐$ 35,000$ ‐$ ‐$ ‐$ 35,000$
FIRE AUTHORITY
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments
SUB‐TOTAL:
Costs to date
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
Totals Comments
City Council
StatusProject Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Command/
Chief Vehicle
This new Command/Chief vehicle would serve as a Division Chief's vehicle.It will replace C‐
6805, a 2006 Chevy 2500 HD, with current mileage of 106,495. The vehicle transmission is
currently failing, leaving the vehicle unfit, unreliable, and leaving team members in a
possibly unsafe or life‐threatening environment during fire suppression activities. However,
the vehicle can be repurposed as a non‐suppression utility vehicle for the department.
Fire Authority City Fire
10021210.
80100 V3165 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 General Yes
New
Revenues $ 75,000 $ 75,000
Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Increased the amount from $50k to
include vehicle outfitting. Moved from
FYE 21.
Reviewed
Command/
Chief Vehicle
This new Command/Chief vehicle will serve as a Command/Chief vehicle. It will replace D‐
6802, a 2007 Chevy 2500 HD with 84,072 miles. This vehicle's transmission is also currently
failing along with multiple other problems, leaving the vehicle unfit, unreliable, leaving team
members in a possibly unsafe or life‐threatening environment during fire suppression
activities. This vehicle will be decommissioned and placed as surplus.
Fire Authority District Fire
91721400.
80100 18277 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 District Yes
New
Revenues $ 75,000 $ 75,000
Purchase cost covers Fire Service
Emergency Vehicle outfitting (Lights,
Siren, Radio's, etc.,)
Reviewed
Auto Extrication
Equipment
It is recommended to replace our aging gas powered hydraulic auto extrication equipment,
commonly know as the "Jaws Of Life". Replacement units will consist of newer technology
battery operated E‐Hydraulic extrication equipment. These newer units will eliminate heavy
gas powered motors and associated hydraulic lines increasing mobility and range of use. This
will be a three year phased purchase to replace the units currently in service.
Fire Authority City/District Fire
91621400.
80100 &
25321210.
80100
18101 Yes
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
Ongoing 2019 2022
Special
Revenue Yes Current
Revenues Prop. 172 $ 57,274 $ 33,000 $ 33,000
The first set has been purchased and
placed into service. Second set has been
purchased. Final purchase set planned
for FYE 22.
Budget
Adopted
SCBA
Compressor
This specialized unit is necessary and mandatory to fill Self‐Contained Breathing Apparatus
Bottles crucial for the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority to carry out our mission of saving and
protecting life, property, and the environment. This unit will be housed at the Central
Station and will replace our current mobile air unit, which is currently out of service.
Fire Authority City Fire
10021210.
80100 18195 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 General Yes
New
Revenues $ 60,000 $ 60,000 This will require new funding. Moved
from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
SCBA/Gear
Sanitizer
This unit is critical for sanitation of fire protection gear and equipment used and worn by
team members, due to the increasing awareness of cancer causing exposures faced by Fire
Personnel. The sanitation of gear and equipment has been proven to reduce the risk to
cancer(s). This promotes a safer and healthier work environment.
Fire Authority City Fire
10021210.
80100 18196 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 General Yes
New
Revenues $ 35,000 $ 35,000
This will require new funding. Moved
from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19. Increased
from $28k.
Reviewed
Water Tender
The Ukiah Valley Authority annual fleet replacement identified WT‐6892 for replacement.
Following industry standard NFPA guidelines recommends fire apparatus serve 10 years or
75,000 miles as a first out response vehicle, and an additional 5 to 10 years or 100,000 miles
in service as a reserve apparatus. WT‐6892 is a 2004 Peterbilt single‐axle 2,500 gallon water
tender. It was initially designed for construction, and was converted to a fire apparatus. It
does not have a fire rated pump, which the apparatus does not meet the demand for service.
The purchase of a new fire rated water tender is vital to the Fire Authority's mission while
working in the rural environment. Additionally, utilizing OES‐State contracts, the entire
purchase cost recovery would be completed over the next few years. WT‐6892 would not
only be placed in a reserve status for the Fire Department, other departments in the City
could utilize the water tender, adding additional cost savings to the City, as they have been
renting a water tender in the past several years.
Fire Authority City Fire
10021210.
80100 V2543 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 TBD Yes Reserves $ 325,000 $ 325,000 Reviewed
Quint Aerial
Apparatus
The Ukiah Valley Fire Authority annual fleet replacement identified T‐6852 for replacement.
Following industry‐standard NFPA guidelines recommends fire engines serve 10‐years or
75,000 miles as a first out response vehicle, and an additional 5 to 10‐years or 100,000 miles
in service as a reserve apparatus. T‐6852 is a 2009 Pierce Quint Aerial Apparatus with a 75‐
ft. ladder with a current mileage of 47,536. With a continually growing city in size and
height, revised truck's specifications will need to be considered to meet future demands. T‐
6852 will be placed in a reserve status for the Department.
Fire Authority City Fire
10021210.
80100 TBD N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2025 2026 TBD No
New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation TBD $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000
Fiscal year allocation might move to out
years contingent on condition of the
vehicle.
Reviewed
Active Shooter
Safety
Equipment
Due to the current events happening around the United States and the world, it is
unfortunate but imperative that we prepare and be equipped for any and all situations the
UVFA may face. We are taking a proactive instead of a reactive stance in protecting and
providing our team members with the equipment they need to handle even the direst
situations. Following industry‐standard (NFPA‐3000 Active Shooter) equipment to be
purchased will include Flak Jackets, Kevlar Helmets, Medical Triage Bags, and Medical Triage
Equipment.
Fire Authority City Fire
10021210.
80100 TBD N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 TBD No
New
Revenues
Fiscal Year
Allocation
TBD/Seek grant
funding.
$ ‐
Staff will actively pursue grants to
possibly offset some cost. Department
estimate/request is $60,000
Reviewed
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
City Council
Status
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date Totals Comments
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 9
Page 466 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
Radios
Due to the Federal Communications Commissions (FCC), all Fire Department Analog Radios
(currently all UVFA radio's are analog) are required to be replaced with Digital Radios. The
FCC's move from analog to digital increased and improved radio efficiency and met the radio
spectrum's increasing demand (Narrow banding). This is a two‐year phased purchase,
replacing the Hand‐Held Radio's in the first year and the Mobile Radio's (Vehicle Radio's) in
the second phase.
Fire Authority City Fire
10021210.
54100 18240 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2023 TBD Yes
New
Revenues
Seeking grant
funding. $ 225,000 $ 153,200 $ 378,200
Staff will continue to actively pursue
grants to possibly offset some of the cost
during the phased process.
Reviewed
Safety
Extractors
This unit is critical for sanitation of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) used and worn by
team members due to the increasing awareness of cancer‐causing exposures faced by Fire
Personnel. The sanitation of gear and equipment has been proven to reduce cancer risk (s)
by removing the carcinogens or our team members deal with while performing their duties.
These Safety Extractors were built and designed to remove debris and carcinogens as a
normal washing machine does not, nor meet the industry standard of NFPA.
Fire Authority District Fire
91621400.
80100 18278 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 District Yes
New
Revenues $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Reviewed
Ambulance
Patient
Transport Unit
This ambulance will serve the greater Ukiah area for the growing demands of the Emergency
Medical Services. The Ukiah Valley Fire Authority has had to supplement/augment the
private ambulance industry to county‐wide ambulance shortage.
Fire Authority Ambulance
71021000.
80100 TBD N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 TBD Yes
New
Revenues
Looking at
financing options. $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Reviewed
Ambulance
Patient
Transport Unit
This ambulance will serve the greater Ukiah area for the growing demands of the Emergency
Medical Services. The Ukiah Valley Fire Authority has had to supplement/augment the
private ambulance industry to county‐wide ambulance shortage.
Fire Authority Ambulance
71021000.
80100 18269 N/A
Doug
Hutchison
dhutchison@cit
yofukiah.com
1500 South
State Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 TBD Yes
New
Revenues
$141,648 to be
CDBG funded,
balance financed.
$ 300,000 $ 300,000 Reviewed
57,274$ 1,408,000$ 153,200$ ‐$ ‐$ 1,500,000$ 3,061,200$
POLICE DEPARTMENT
SUB‐TOTAL:
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Annual Police
Car
Replacement
Annually the Police Department schedules the replacement of two patrol cars. Typically, a
patrol car lasts about 3 years before it reaches the end of it's service life. It takes the
department about a year to order, receive and outfit a car for patrol use. By scheduling
regular replacement of cars, the department ensures we have enough cars available for use.
Police Police
10020210.
80100
V4209
&
V4215
N/A Justin
Wyatt
jwyatt@cityofki
ah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
Ongoing 2021 2026 General No
New
Revenues
May explore
financing options. $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 500,000
Two Dodge Charger Pursuits planned for
FYE 20 fiscal year deferred to FYE 21.
However, three vehicles over the past 1.5
years have been replaced by insurance
due to collisions. One vehicle
replacement was recommend by CM for
FYE 21, but both vehicles deferred to FYE
22 due to COVID‐19.
Reviewed
Replace Vehicle
Mounted Video
Cameras
The Ukiah Police Department has utilized vehicle mounted video cameras within Police
vehicles for approximately 20 years, to memorialize officer contacts, criminal conduct, and
investigative activities. These video and audio recordings are used as evidence in criminal
and civil cases, as well as for internal quality assurance. The current recording equipment has
been in use since 2015, and the recording hardware, software and operating system are
outdated and have become cumbersome and unreliable. The replacement system would
provide for evidentiary data storage and processing as well as technical,software, and
hardware support throughout a 5‐year purchasing plan.
Police Police
10020210.
54100 18241 N/A
Justin
Wyatt
jwyatt@cityofu
kiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery, and
Equipment
New 2021 2026 General No
New
Revenues
Grant funding
may be available.14,604$ 32,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 132,000$ Reviewed
Replace Tasers
The Ukiah Police Department has deployed Tasers since 2018, utilizing a 5‐year purchasing
program to maintain current equipment and which provides support for hardware, supplies,
and technology through the term of the agreement. The current agreement with Axon
expires in 2022.
Police Police
10020210.
54100 TBD N/A
Justin
Wyatt
jwyatt@cityofu
kiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery, and
Equipment
New 2022 2026 General No
New
Revenues
Grant funding
may be available.41,345$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 15,000$ 60,000$ Reviewed
Replace Body
Cameras
The Ukiah Police Department has deployed body‐cameras to memorialize officer contacts,
criminal conduct, and investigative activities for more than 10 years. These video and audio
recordings are used as evidence in criminal and civil cases, as well as for internal quality
assurance. The current purchasing program expires in 2023, and provides for evidence
storage, current and reliable equipment, and support for hardware and software for the
term of the agreement.
Police Police
10020210.
54100 TBD N/A
Justin
Wyatt
jwyatt@cityofu
kiah.com
300
Seminary
Avenue
Vehicles,
Machinery, and
Equipment
New 2023 2026 General No
New
Revenues
Grant funding
may be available.98,037$ 35,000$ 22,000$ 22,000$ 79,000$ Reviewed
153,986$ 132,000$ 140,000$ 175,000$ 162,000$ 162,000$ 771,000$
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
SUB‐TOTAL:
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateAllocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Asphalt Zipper ‐
Shared Cost
The current equipment is Equipment #1000, a 1994 Wirgten W500 Grinder. This is a CARB
Tier 0, and a retrofit for this unit is unavailable. This equipment assists in the ongoing
maintenance of the Streets network in order to provide upgraded facilities for our residents.
Three divisions will contribute: $120,000 total
Public Works Streets
10024620.
80100 E1001
Shared with
820 Water
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 General Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 40,000 $ 40,000 Moved from FYE 23 due to COVID‐19.
Moved from FYE 24.Reviewed
Asphalt Roller ‐
Shared Cost
The current equipment is Equipment #1611, a 1995 CAT CB214C Roller. This is CARB Tier 0,
and a retrofit for this unit is unavailable. This equipment assists in the ongoing maintenance
of the Streets network in order to provide upgraded facilities for our residents. Three
divisions will contribute: $66,000 total
Public Works Streets
10024620.
80100 E1612
Shared with
820 Water
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 General Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 22,000 $ 22,000 Moved from FYE 23 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Asphalt Paver ‐
Shared Cost
The current equipment is Equipment #1811, a 1998 LeeBoy Model 1000B Paver.This is a
CARB Tier 0, and a retrofit for this unit is unavailable. This equipment assists in the ongoing
maintenance of the Streets network in order to provide upgraded facilities for our residents.
Three divisions will contribute: $210,000 total
Public Works Streets
10024620.
80100 E1812
Shared with
820 Water
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 General Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 70,000 $ 70,000 Moved from FYE 23 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Bucket Truck
Replacement ‐
Shared Cost
There are currently two bucket trucks, Vehicle #2221, a 1992 Ford F450 which is being put
into surplus in fiscal year 2017/2018, and Vehicle #2230, a 1995 Ford F450, which will be kept
into service until it is replaced. It is used to trim street and park trees, and also assists in
hanging banners which promote City services and activities which benefit the community.
Two divisions share the cost. Total cost: $100,000
Public Works Streets
10024620.
80100 V2224 Shared with
100 Parks David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 General No
Current
Revenues $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Look to match replacement with surplus
from Electric Utility. Moved to FYE 23.Reviewed
Water Tender ‐
Shared Cost
The current water tender no longer meets emission standards and is inoperable. Will be
used to water street trees, Riverside Park, fill Vactor trucks and be available to support
mowing and Fire operations. Five divisions share the cost: $150,000 total
Public Works Streets
10024620.
80100 TBD
Shared with
100 Parks,
779 Airport,
820 Water,
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 50,000 $ 50,000
Moved to FYE 21. Spent over $15k this
past year for rental of a unit. Moved
from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19. Moved
from FYE 22. If new Fire Tender is
approved for FYE 22, the replaced unit
will become available for other City
departments, and this item will then be
eliminated.
Reviewed
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
City Council
Status
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to date Totals Comments
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Project
Status
Project
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Estimated Cost per Fiscal Year
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 10
Page 467 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
Flat Rack Truck Replace existing Flat Rack Truck due to age and mileage. Public Works Streets
10024220.
80100 V2236 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 General Yes
Current
Revenues $ 62,500 $ 62,500 Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
3‐Yard Dump
Truck Replace existing 3‐yard dump truck due to age and mileage. Public Works Streets
10024220.
80100 TBD N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 General Yes
Current
Revenues $ 102,000 $ 102,000 Moved from FYE 23 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Loader
Replacement Replace existing loader due to CARB requirements. Public Works Streets 10024620.
80100 E1413
Shared with
820 Water
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 General Yes
Current
Revenues $ 110,000 $ 110,000 Reviewed
Dump Truck
Replacement
Dump Truck Replacement for 3 years. This equipment is used to maintain and repair the
Infrastructure for our citizens. Total cost: $500,000 Public Works Corporation
Yard
20824300.
80100 18017 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024
Internal
Service Yes Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 500,000 $ 500,000
Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19.
Reduced cost from $750k due to splitting
Loader to separate line.
Reviewed
‐$ 150,000$ 162,500$ 694,000$ ‐$ ‐$ 1,006,500$
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
SUB‐TOTAL:
Start End 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26
Replace Water
Treatment Plant
Service Truck
The current vehicle's useful is expected to be exceeded in future years and will need to be
replaced.
Water
Resources
Water
Treatment Plant
82227113.
80100 V3754 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
935 River
Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Moved from FYE 23. Moved back to FYE
23.Reviewed
Convert
Chlorine Gas to
Liquid Chlorine
at Water
This project will replace chlorine gas at the Water Treatment Plant and convert to Liquid
Chlorine for safety reasons
Water
Resources
Water
Treatment Plant
82227113.
80100 18133 N/A
Michelle
Wagenet
mwagenet@cit
yofukiah.com
Water
Treatment
Plant
Infrastructure New 2020 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 50,000 $ 270,000 $ 320,000
Was budgeted FYE 20, moved to start in
FYE 21 due to COVID‐19. Moved $270k
from FYE 22. Moved $50k from FYE 21.
Budget
Adopted
Replace
Turbidimeters Replace Turbidimeters at Water Treatment Plant.Water
Resources
Water
Treatment Plant
82227113.
80100 TBD N/A
Michelle
Wagenet
mwagenet@cit
yofukiah.com
935 River
Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Reviewed
Transfer Pump Purchase a transfer pump for emergency use at the Backwash Basins and Interties Water
Resources
Water
Treatment Plant
82227113.
80100 18242 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
935 River
Street
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 35,000 $ 35,000 Reviewed
Water Meter
Replacements Upgrade aged meter in order to provide increased service efficiency.Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100 18074 N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com Various
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2020 2026 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 250,000
Ongoing ‐ reduced FYE 21 from $50k,
added $50k to FYE 24 due to COVID‐19.
Added funding for FYE 25 and 26.
Budget
Adopted
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100 V3753 Shared with
840 Sewer David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 30,000
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100 V3753 Shared with
820 Water David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 30,000
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100 TBD Shared with
840 Sewer David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 20,000
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100 TBD Shared with
820 Water David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 20,000
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100
Shared with
100 Streets
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 40,000
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100
Shared with
100 Streets
and 820
Water
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 40,000
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100
Shared with
100 Streets
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 22,000
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100
Shared with
100 Streets
and 820
Water
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 66,000
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100
Shared with
100 Streets
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 70,000
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100
Shared with
100 Streets
and 820
Water
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2023 2024 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues
Department plans
to set aside funds
for this
replacement.
$ 70,000
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100
Shared with
840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise No
Current
Revenues $ 225,000
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100
Shared with
820 Water David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise No
Current
Revenues $ 225,000
The current equipment is Equipment #1000, a 1994 Wirgten W500 Grinder. This is a CARB
Tier 0, and a retrofit for this unit is unavailable. This equipment assists in the ongoing
maintenance of the Streets network in order to provide upgraded facilities for our residents.
Three divisions will contribute: $120,000 total
E1001 $ 80,000
Project Name Project Description Department Division Org/Object
Pr
oj
e
ct
Num
be
r
Totals Comments
City Council
Status
Estimated Cost per Fiscal YearProject
Timeline Funding
Source
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
Funding
Type
Funding Type
Add'l Comments Costs to dateAllocation to
Multi‐funds
Project
Status
Vactor
Replacement ‐
Shared Cost
The existing vehicle, Vehicle #2515, a 2009 VacCon V350 LHA, will need to be replaced as it
will be soon reaching its end‐of‐life. This equipment assists in repairing and maintaining the
Water Distribution and Sewer Collection System in order to provide services to our rate
payers. Two divisions share the cost: $450,000 total
V2518 $ 450,000
Asphalt Roller ‐
Shared Cost
The current equipment is Equipment #1611, a 1995 CAT CB214C Roller. This is CARB Tier 0,
and a retrofit for this unit is unavailable. This equipment assists in the ongoing maintenance
of the Streets network in order to provide upgraded facilities for our residents. Three
divisions will contribute: $66,000 total
E1612 $ 88,000
Asphalt Paver ‐
Shared Cost
The current equipment is Equipment #1811, a 1998 LeeBoy Model 1000B Paver. This is a
CARB Tier 0, and a retrofit for this unit is unavailable. This equipment assists in the ongoing
maintenance of the Streets network in order to provide upgraded facilities for our residents.
Three divisions will contribute: $210,000 total
E1812 $ 140,000
Asphalt Zipper ‐
Shared Cost
Replace
Water/Sewer
Operations Call
Truck ‐ Shared
Cost
The current vehicle's useful is expected to be exceeded in future years and will need
replaced
Replace
Water/Sewer
Operations Lead
Worker Truck ‐
Shared Cost
The current vehicle's useful life is expected to be exceeded in future years and will need
replaced $ 40,000
Reviewed $ 60,000
Project
Contact
Name (s)
Project Contact
Email (s)
Project
Location
Improvement
Type
Moved from FYE 23 due to COVID‐19.
Moved from FYE 24.Reviewed
Reviewed
Moved from FYE 23 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Moved from FYE 23 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
Electric Utility Department needs will
also be considered. Revised budget
amount from $150k. (Revision after rate
study.) Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐
19. Moved from FYE 23. Moved from FYE
22.
Reviewed
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 11
Page 468 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100
Shared with
100 Parks,
100 Streets,
779 Airport
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 40,000
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100
Shared with
100 Parks,
100 Streets,
779 Airport
and 820
Water
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 40,000
Water
Resources
Water
Operations
82027114.
80100
Shared with
100 Streets
and 840
Wastewater
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 110,000
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100
Shared with
100 Streets
and 820
Water
David Kirch dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
1320
Airport
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 110,000
Ford/Orchard
Lift Station
Upgrade
This needs upgrading to change from single to three phase power, installing two new pumps,
the pump guides, and the discharge valves.
Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations
84027221.
80100 18134 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
Ford/Orcha
rd
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 200,000 $ 200,000
Moved from FYE 20 and revised budget
from $100k. (Revised since rate study.)
Moved from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19.
Budget
Adopted
Telescoping Lift
This equipment is needed at the Wastewater Treatment Plant to assist in maintaining the
facility which provides Waste Water Treatment for the City and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation
District.
Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 E1718 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 20,000 $ 20,000
Rebudgeted FYE 20. Moved from FYE 20
due to COVID‐19. Increased the amount
from $12k.
Reviewed
Digester
Rehabilitation
and Methane
Scrubber
Methane Scrubbers are needed in order to clean the methane gas to provide an alternate
energy source to operate the boilers at the Wastewater Treatment Plant, which will in turn
decrease the City's energy cost at the plant.
Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18135 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2019 2025 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues
Cost will be offset
by saving in the
purchase of
natural gas
$ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 Moved from FYE 22 due to COVID‐19. Reviewed
SCADA Upgrade
at Waste Water
Treatment Plant
Upgrade the ancient SCADA system at the Wastewater Treatment Plant.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18137 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
Wastewater
Treatment
Plant
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 300,000 $ 300,000
Move from FYE 20. (Revision after rate
study.) Moved from FYE 21. Increased
from $200k.
Budget
Adopted
VFD Installation
at Wastewater
Treatment Plant
This project will involve installing Variable Frequency Drives on various points in the
treatment process
Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18138 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
Wastewater
Treatment
Plant
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 90,000 $ 90,000 Increased from $55,700. Reviewed
Replace Ford
Ranger Replace Ford Ranger at the Wastewater Treatment Plant.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 V4544 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2022 2023 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 40,000 $ 40,000
(Not on CIP during rate study.) Moved
from FYE 21 due to COVID‐19. Moved to
FYE 23.
Reviewed
Recondition
Yardney Filters Recondition the filters that produce in‐house plant utility wash water.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18243 N/A Alan Hodge
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 65,000 $ 65,000 Reviewed
Install Flow
Sensors Install Flow Sensor on the effluent at the Chlorine Contact Basins.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18244 N/A Alan Hodge
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Reviewed
Belt Filter Press
Replacement
This project will replace the existing Belt Filter Press Equipment which has passed its useful
life.
Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18130 N/A David Kirch
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Reviewed
Vibration
Monitoring
Equipment
Install vibration monitoring equipment on motors to identify bearing deterioration.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18245 N/A David Kirch
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Reviewed
Upgrade PLCs Upgrade old Programmable Logic Controls.Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18246 N/A Alan Hodge
ahodge@cityof
ukiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 350,000 $ 350,000 Reviewed
Quick Connect
Pipe for
Recycled Water
Purchase pipe redirecting stored water in the Recycled Water Ponds.Water
Resources Recycled Water 83027330.
80100 18247 N/A Jarod Thiele
jthiele@cityofu
kiah.com
3495 Taylor
Drive
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Reviewed
DAFT
Replacement
Perform repairs to components of the Dissolved Air Flotation Thickener (DAFT) at the
Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Water
Resources
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
84027225.
80100 18248 N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
300 Plant
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2021 2022 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Reviewed
Vichy Springs
Lift Station
Upgrade
This needs upgrading to install two new pumps, the pump guides, and the discharge valves.Water
Resources
Sewer
Operations DISTRICT TBD N/A David Kirch
dkirch@cityofu
kiah.com
Vichy
Springs
Road
Vehicles,
Machinery &
Equipment
New 2024 2026 Enterprise Yes
Current
Revenues $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Reviewed
‐$ 2,785,000$ 805,000$ 588,000$ 1,550,000$ 300,000$ 6,028,000$
212,260$ 5,810,845$ 3,698,700$ 1,712,000$ 1,712,000$ 1,962,000$ 14,895,545$
TBDWater Tender ‐
Shared Cost
The current water tender no longer meets emission standards and is inoperable. Will be
used to water street trees, Riverside Park, fill Vactor trucks and be available to support
mowing and Fire operations. Five divisions share the cost: $150,000 total
$ 80,000
SUB‐TOTAL:
TOTALS FOR VEHICLES, MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT :
Moved to FYE 21. Revised budget
amount from $35k. (Revision after rate
study.) Spent over $15k this past year for
rental of a unit. Moved from FYE 21 due
to COVID‐19. Moved from FYE 22. If new
Fire Tender is approved for FYE 22, the
replaced unit will become available for
other City departments, and this item will
then be eliminated.
Reviewed
Loader
Replacement Replace existing loader due to CARB requirements. $ 220,000 E1413 Reviewed
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 12
Page 469 of 550
FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN*
JULY 2021
Project Name
Project
Description
Division
Org/Object
Project
Number
Allocation to
Multi‐funds
Project Status
Project
Timeline
Funding Source
Funding
Identified
Funding Type
Funding Type
Add 'l
Comments
Costs to date
Estimated
Costs per Fiscal
Year
Totals
Comments
City Council
Status
"Not Reviewed"‐ First time that Council has been presented the project; "Reviewed" ‐ Council has been presented the project during an agendized meeting; "Explore" ‐ Council has reviewed and has asked staff to further explore; "Reviewed and Supported" ‐ Council has reviewed and supports the placement of the project on the CIP Plan; "Budget Adopted" ‐ Council has approved the project through the Council action that takes plac
through either the full budget adoption process, or through a specific agendized item brought to Council
"Reserves" indicates it is, or is planned to be, transferred from a reserve account, "Current Revenues" means that the expenditure is anticipated to funded by existing revenues at the time of the purchase, "New Revenues" means that a funding source other than current revenues will be used, including or grant funding or fundraising.
To further explain, as necessary, the funding type used selected.
Costs spent on the project.
Costs estimated to be spent in each of the fiscal years.
The sum of the five year estimate for each project.
Additional information as needed.
The number assigned to track all expenses related to the project.
Indicates if the cost of the proposed cost is shared. In this case, here it will state what other funds are sharing the cost.
This indicates whether the project is "NEW", "IN PROGRESS", "ONGOING" or "COMPLETED".
General calendar year "start" and "end" date.
The Fund the actual expense will come out of.
"Yes" indicating funding has been identified and will be available, "No" indicating funding has not yet been identified and is unavailable.
Definition of terms used:
The name of the project.
Provides a description and additional narrative to assist in the understanding of the need and value of the proposed project.
The specific division within the identified department where the expenditure will be made within the budget.
The proposed account code where the expense will be accounted for.
*Refer to last page of this document for definition of terms used.PAGE 13
Page 470 of 550
ESTIMATED COST: $330,000
FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
Last 10 Years‐ $21,000
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: Upgrade emissions to meet current CARB standards is not an option as the equipment is not available.
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: N/A
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: The current equipment does not meet CARB standards and is limited to use of 200 hours per year.
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: This equipment will be used daily to operate the asphalt zipper, clean homeless encampments, to support water
and sewer projects, load waste bins and for maintenance of the Corporation Yard facility.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2021 Cat Loader
MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE
PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR
EACH DEPT/DIV
ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUEESTIMATED LIFE IN
MILEAGE/HOURS
YEAR CITY EQUIPMENT #
ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
1411
None
6,000
MODEL
CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
$110,000Streets E1413
PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
5,000
NO
CURRENT CONDITION: Poor
$5,000.00
ESTIMATED OUT‐OF‐SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS?
82227113.80100Water E1413
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification
DIVISION(S)
PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Loader
SUBMITTED BY: Dave Kirch, Fleet & Plant Maintenance Supervisor
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2021/2022
1988 Case W20C
EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED
ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
$110,000
10024620.80100
DEPARTMENT(S)
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 20 years
JAK0019261
VIN/SERIAL #
Sewer E1413
$110,000
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: Replacement
84427222.80100
Public Works
Water Resources
Water Resources
DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: N/A
200‐300 hours
1,500 hours Yes
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:
ATTACHMENT 3
Page 471 of 550
ESTIMATED COST $125,000
FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: This unit does not comply with OSHA forklift standards.
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 15‐20 years
J‐008281
VIN/SERIAL #
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: Replacement
42 NO
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2021/2022
????G3P‐150‐CFS‐158
EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED
ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification
DIVISION(S)
PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Lift (Large capacity fork lift)
SUBMITTED BY: Tim Santo
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:
Electric
DEPARTMENT(S)
PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
1105
NO
CURRENT CONDITION: Poor
$500.00
ESTIMATED OUT‐OF‐SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS?
Brakes,Hyd. Pump
MODEL
CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
$125,000.0080126100.80100Utility E1721
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: The current large lift capacity fork lift does not comply with OSHA fork lift standards. This unit is used for heavy
material handling including large electric distribution transformers.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): The new unit will need to be capable of material handling
up to 16,000 lbs.
MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE
PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR
EACH DEPT/DIV
ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUEESTIMATED LIFE IN
MILEAGE/HOURS
YEAR CITY EQUIPMENT #
ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
1720
SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
???
$4,252.00
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED:
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS:
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS:
Page 472 of 550
ESTIMATED COST: $325,000
FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
Unknown
Unknown
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: WT‐6892 would not only be placed in a reserve status for the Fire Department. Other departments in the City could also utilize the
Water Tender, adding additional cost savings to the City as the City has been renting Water Tenders over the past decade for Public Works.
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: Purchasing a new Fire Rated water tender is vital to the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority's mission while working in the rural
environment. Additionally, utilizing the OES‐State Contract, the entire purchase's cost recovery would be recovered over the next few years.
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: The Ukiah Valley Fire Authority annual fleet replacement identified WT‐6892 for replacement. Following industry‐standard
NFPA guidelines recommends fire apparatus serve 10‐years or 75,000 miles as a first out response vehicle, and an additional 5 to 10‐years or 100,000 miles in
service as a reserve apparatus. WT‐6892 was initially designed for construction and converted to a fire apparatus; it currently does not have a fire‐rated pump.
The apparatus does not meet the demand for service.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): New Water Tender ‐ 2‐door commercial cab and chassis
with a 2000 gallon water tank, 1000 gpm pump, and equipped to meet all the requirements of NFPA 1901 Standard on Motorized Fire Apparatus both as a
pumper and a mobile water supply apparatus.
MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE
PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR
EACH DEPT/DIV
ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUEESTIMATED LIFE IN
MILEAGE/HOURS
YEAR CITY EQUIPMENT #
ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
WT‐6892
MODEL
CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
$325,00010021210.80100City Fire V2543
ESTIMATED OUT‐OF‐SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS?
N/A
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:
Fire Authority
DEPARTMENT(S)
PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
26,400 / 3961hrs
No
CURRENT CONDITION: Good
$40,000 ‐ $50,000
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification
DIVISION(S)
PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Water Tender
SUBMITTED BY: Battalion Chief Eric Singleton
Unknown OEM
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2021/2022
2004 Peterbilt
EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED
ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: N/A
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10‐20 years
2NPLHZ6X15M872544
VIN/SERIAL #
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: New Request
Page 473 of 550
ESTIMATED COST: $75,000
FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Due to the condition of the vehicle, it is to be decommissioned and placed as a surplus.
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10‐20 Years
1GCHK29UX6E172000
VIN/SERIAL #
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: Replacement of existing.
430hrs Some OEM / Aftermarket
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2021/2022
2006 Chevy 3/4 4X4
EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED
ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification
DIVISION(S)
PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Command/Chief Vehicle
SUBMITTED BY: Battalion Chief Eric Singleton
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:
UVFA
DEPARTMENT(S)
PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
107,084 / 3963.3 Hours
YES
CURRENT CONDITION: This vehicle is in poor condition; the vehicle was involved in a collision in 2014 in which it had significant front‐end
damage. The vehicle was repaired and placed back into service. The vehicle's transmission is currently slipping and will need to be replaced in
a short amount of time.
$1,000 to $2,000
ESTIMATED OUT‐OF‐SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS?
Transmission needs to be replaced ($4,000)
100,000 / 6,000 Hours
MODEL
CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
$75,000.0010021210.80100City Fire V3165
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: This vehicle will serve as a Command/Chief vehicle, perform vital daily duties, and serve during operational
incidents. Due to the transmission and other mechanical engine failures, this vehicle is unfit and unreliable, leaving team members in a
possibly unsafe or life‐threatening environment during fire suppression operations.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2021 3/4 Tone 4X4 Pickup
MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE
PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR
EACH DEPT/DIV
ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUEESTIMATED LIFE IN
MILEAGE/HOURS
YEAR CITY EQUIPMENT #
ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
3162
SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
$36,500.00
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: None
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: Based on history, the vehicles' use should extend well beyond the standard useful life of 5‐10 years to most likely 15
‐20 years. Following NFPA standards, ten years serving as a front line vehicle and ten years as a reserve or utility vehicle. The vehicle's benefit
will allow staff to perform adequate fire operational needs/duties to the City and the District.
Page 474 of 550
ESTIMATED COST $40,000
FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: None
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10 years
N/A
VIN/SERIAL #
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: New Request
N/A N/A
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2021/2022
N/A N/A
EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED
ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification
DIVISION(S)
PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Ford F‐150 Pick‐up
SUBMITTED BY: Dave Kirch, Fleet & Plant Maintenance Supervisor
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:
Community Services
DEPARTMENT(S)
PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
N/A
N/A
CURRENT CONDITION:
N/A
ESTIMATED OUT‐OF‐SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS?
N/A
N/A
MODEL
CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
$40,00010022100.80100Parks V3765
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: New proposed Parks service worker/horticulturist.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): F‐150 pick‐up hybrid or electric vehicle.
MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE
PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR
EACH DEPT/DIV
ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUEESTIMATED LIFE IN
MILEAGE/HOURS
YEAR CITY EQUIPMENT #
ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
N/A
SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
N/A
N/A
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: N/A
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: N/A
Page 475 of 550
ESTIMATED COST $50,000
FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:
DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Original purchase price does not reflect total cost of fully outfitted vehicle for intended purpose and use.
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: Reliability and availability will allow for better response times to calls.
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: The vehicle will soon be past its useful life and estimated life in mileage. In addition, the out of service time is
substantial. The vehicle has extensive mechanical issues which would require and extensive amount of troubleshooting. The vehicle has
consistently had a lack of power and speed, topping out at 80 mph and additional unknown/undiagnosed engine problems.
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: Police vehicles are equipped with safety equipment, radios, lights and sirens, provide transportation for police
services and are authorized for emergency response and pursuit activities. The department currently deploys as many as 4 uniformed patrol
officers a shift and 7 shared vehicles are currently within the fleet, to allow for scheduled maintenance activities, unanticipated mechanical
failures, and emergencies which may require the deployment of additional personnel.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2021 Dodge Charger pursuit
PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR
EACH DEPT/DIV
ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUEESTIMATED LIFE IN
MILEAGE/HOURS
YEAR CITY EQUIPMENT #
ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
4116
MODEL
CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
$50,00010020210.80100Police V4209
ESTIMATED OUT‐OF‐SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS?
Transmission replacement‐$4,000
100,000
Police
N/A
VIN/SERIAL #
$30,438.00
$12,200.00
MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE
PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
90,000
Yes
CURRENT CONDITION: Both vehicles have significant mileage of high demand police activities. After 100,000 miles police vehicles begin to
suffer from cracked frames and other significant structural and suspension issues as well as repeated, significant mechanical failures.
$1,000.00
665 Limited quantities, harder to find due to age
2011 Ford Crown Victoria
EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification
DIVISION(S)
PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: POLICE CARS‐ANNUAL REPLACEMENT‐SUV
SUBMITTED BY: Lt. Andy Phillips
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2021/2022
ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 5‐10 YEARS
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?:
DEPARTMENT(S)
Replacement of existing.
Page 476 of 550
ESTIMATED COST $50,000
FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification
DIVISION(S)
PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: POLICE CARS‐ANNUAL REPLACEMENT‐SUV
SUBMITTED BY: Lt. Andy Phillips
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2021/2022
ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 5‐10 YEARS
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?:
DEPARTMENT(S)
MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE
PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
90,000
Yes
CURRENT CONDITION: Both vehicles have significant mileage of high demand police activities. After 100,000 miles police vehicles begin to
suffer from cracked frames and other significant structural and suspension issues as well as repeated, significant mechanical failures.
$1,000.00
665 Limited quantities, harder to find due to age
2011 Ford Crown Victoria
EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED
Police V4215
ESTIMATED OUT‐OF‐SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE)MEET CARB STANDARDS?
Transmission replacement‐$4,000
100,000
Police
N/A
VIN/SERIAL #
$30,438.00
$12,200.00
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2021 Dodge Charger pursuit
PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR
EACH DEPT/DIV
ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUEESTIMATED LIFE IN
MILEAGE/HOURS
YEAR CITY EQUIPMENT #
ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
4116
MODEL
CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
$50,00010020210.80100
SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:
DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Original purchase price does not reflect total cost of fully outfitted vehicle for intended purpose and use.
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS: Reliability and availability will allow for better response times to calls.
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: The vehicle will soon be past its useful life and estimated life in mileage. In addition, the out of service time is
substantial. The vehicle has extensive mechanical issues which would require and extensive amount of troubleshooting. The vehicle has
consistently had a lack of power and speed, topping out at 80 mph and additional unknown/undiagnosed engine problems.
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: Police vehicles are equipped with safety equipment, radios, lights and sirens, provide transportation for police
services and are authorized for emergency response and pursuit activities. The department currently deploys as many as 4 uniformed patrol
officers a shift and 7 shared vehicles are currently within the fleet, to allow for scheduled maintenance activities, unanticipated mechanical
failures, and emergencies which may require the deployment of additional personnel.
Replacement of existing.
Page 477 of 550
ESTIMATED COST $550,000
FLEET MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR
DEPARTMENT HEAD
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: One unit will be partially funded with $141,648 of CDBG grant funding, the balance for both is planned to be
financed.
ASSET USEFUL LIFE: 10 years
VIN/SERIAL #
$300,000.00
NEW REQUEST OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING?: New
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2021/2022
EXISTING VEHICLE OR EQUIPMENT REQUESTING TO BE REPLACED
ORG & OBJECT ACCOUNT CODE
City Fire Ambulance 18269
Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification
DIVISION(S)
PROJECT
CODE
ITEM: Ambulances ‐ 2 Each
SUBMITTED BY: Battalion Chief Eric Singleton
REVIEWED & APPROVED BY:
City Fire
DEPARTMENT(S)
PROPOSED VEHICLE OR HEAVY EQUIPMENT
CURRENT CONDITION:
ESTIMATED OUT‐OF‐SERVICE TIME PARTS AVAILABLE
ADDITIONAL NEEDED REPAIRS ESTIMATE (IF APPLICABLE) MEET CARB STANDARDS?
MODEL
CURRENT MILEAGE/HOURS
$250,000.0071021100.80100
71021100.80100
Ambulance TBD
JUSTIFICATION/USE/NEED: These new ambulance will serve the greater Ukiah area for the growing demands of the Emergency Medical Services. The
Ukiah Valley Fire Authority (UVFA) has had to supplement/augment the private ambulance industry to county‐wide ambulance shortage. As the UVFA makes a
more significant footprint into the ambulance service, we will need the resources and equipment to serve the community.
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (ATTACH ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION IF NECESSARY): 2021 F‐450 Type‐I Ambulance
MAINTENANCE COSTS TO DATE
PROPOSED BUDGETED AMOUNT FOR
EACH DEPT/DIV
ESTIMATED SALVAGE/RESALE VALUEESTIMATED LIFE IN
MILEAGE/HOURS
YEAR CITY EQUIPMENT #
ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE
SIGNATURE DATE
EST. MILEAGE/HOURS PER YEAR
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS EXPLORED: N/A
OTHER INDIRECT BENEFITS:
COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS: Utilizing a billing service for use and transport will offset the cost of the vehicle and personnel.
Page 478 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Attachment 4
RESOLUTION NO. 2021 -xx
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ESTABLISHING THE
FISCAL YEAR 2021-22 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 7910, the City Council must, by
resolution, establish its appropriations limit for each fiscal year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the appropriations limit for the City of
Ukiah for the 2021-22 Fiscal Year shall be forty-eight million, forty-four thousand, and two hundred
thirty-eight dollars ($48,044,238). The appropriations subject to this limit are estimated to be
nineteen million, nine hundred and ninety thousand, seven hundred and forty-four dollars
($19,990,744).
This resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Ukiah at a regular meeting
thereof on the 16th day of June, 2021, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
______________________________
JUAN OROZCO, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
KRISTINE LAWLER, City Clerk
Page 479 of 550
Page 2 of 2
Page 480 of 550
1
BUDGET APPROVAL AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered on , 2021, in Ukiah, California, between the City
of Ukiah (“City”), a general law municipal corporation, and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
(“District”), a county sanitation district.
1. The City and the District agree to approve as shared costs of the Combined
CITY/DISTRICT Sewer System (“Combined System”) for fiscal year 2021-22 the City budget for
direct expenditures of personnel, operations, and capital outlay, and the indirect expenditures
of internal service use of the Wastewater Enterprise, as set forth in the attached Exhibit A.
Total direct operating budgeted costs, defined as costs of Personnel and Operations in Exhibit A
of $4,524,050 as well as an Operating Indirect Rate (“OIR”) on such costs of 14.20% ($642,415)
for a total budgeted estimate of $5,166,465 will be shared 50.16% District and 49.84% City, as
identified in the 2020 Joint Sewer Rate Study. This share is provisional for 2022 fiscal year and
will be revised by the City and District by September 30, 2021. The revision will be retroactive
to July 1, 2021 and will be perfected by written communication between the City and District.
Total direct costs of $2,730,000 for Capital Outlay in Exhibit A will be funded by both the
City and District when the cost is incurred, as well as an Indirect Rate on such costs incurred not
to exceed x%, which is the five-year average of Indirect Costs incurred and budgeted by the
Combined System related to Purchasing and Insurance. This rate will be referred to as the
Capital Indirect Rate (“CIR”) and will be negotiated for projects over $200,000 based on an
estimate of required Indirect Costs to complete the capital project The City and District will use
the CIR on all Capital Outlay with costs less than $200,000 unless either party desires to
negotiate the rate for any individual project. The City Engineer or City’s Water Resources
Director will communicate verbally or in writing to the District Manager when such
expenditures are expected to begin. The District will pay to the City the District’s share of the
cost for an approved capital expense within fifteen (15) days of the date of an invoice given to
the District for that expense. On and after the effective date of this Agreement, any portion of
capital projects paid by the District will be capitalized on its books as intangible assets and
depreciated.
The shared costs presented in Exhibit A exclude District and City administrative and
other overhead costs allocated directly to the wastewater activities of the City and District. The
City and District shall incur 100% of each agency’s own administrative and other costs not
shown on Exhibit A.
2. For any costs incurred for District-only activities or projects (e.g. a main line
replacement of a District asset), that the City is required to perform or contracted to perform
on the District’s behalf, the City may include in total project costs an amount to cover the City’s
indirect administrative and overhead costs. Before the City is required to perform the work, the
parties shall negotiate and agree on the amount thereof to include in the project costs to be
paid by the District. In the event of an emergency or urgent need to commence work before
the parties can negotiate and agree on the total project costs, including indirect administrative
Attachment 5
Page 481 of 550
2
and overhead costs, the City and the District shall negotiate and agree on those costs before a
final cost settlement is made.
3. The District shall pay to the City by the 1st of every month starting July 1, 2021,
1/12th ($430,538) of the District’s share of the agreed operating budget (Personnel, Operations,
and Indirect Rate) shown in Exhibit A. City is not required to generate an invoice for these
payments which are regularly scheduled fixed monthly payments to the City by the District. As
provided in Section II.D.4.a of the Operating Agreement, the City and District will review every
quarter the actual costs incurred. This City and District will reconcile differences between
actual costs incurred, budget costs, and over/under payments made by either agency no later
than 90 days after the end of the fiscal year, June 30.
4. Payments under subsections b and c above shall be subject to interest as provided in
Section II.D.4.b of the Operating Agreement.
5. Both parties have multiple outstanding issues related to this budget and budget years
2018-19 and 2019-20 but will forgo asserting them for this budget year (2021-22) with the
understanding that neither party is waiving its right to raise any or all of these same issues for
future budgets. Neither this Agreement nor the approved expenditures and budget shall be
treated by either party as an admission or concession that any such objection or concern lacks
merit or has the effect of waiving any such objection or preventing it from being asserted in the
future.
The parties have entered this agreement on the date first written above.
UKIAH VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT CITY OF UKIAH
By: _____________________
Ernie Wipf, Chairperson Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
ATTEST: ATTEST:
By: _________________ _____________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM APPROVED AS TO FORM
_____________________ _____________________
_________, General Counsel David J. Rapport, City Attorney
Attachment 5
Page 482 of 550
3
Exhibit A
Shared Costs Between City and District for the Combined City/District Sewer System
Fiscal Year 2021-22
Budget by Activity (Collection and Treatment)
Budget by Character (Major Cost Category)
Attachment 5
Page 483 of 550
4
Exhibit A (cont)
Shared Costs Between City and District for the Combined City/District Sewer System
Fiscal Year 2021-22
Budget by Object
Attachment 5
Page 484 of 550
5
Attachment 5
Page 485 of 550
6
Attachment 5
Page 486 of 550
POLICY RESOLUTION NO. ______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH
ESTABLISHING FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ukiah approves an annual operating budget,
requiring a long-term perspective and emphasis on a policy-oriented budget process, and;
WHEREAS, clear direction on basic financial policy issues can assist in setting and prioritizing
City goals and in clarifying direction on budget issues, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council has identified a number of policy areas in which it can document
basic financial management principles.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah rescinds
Policy Resolution No. 39 (2013) and:
THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah
approves the attached Financial Management Policies for the City of Ukiah (Exhibit A).
PASSED AND ADOPTED on June 16, 2021, by the following Roll Call Vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN :
ABSENT:
_____________________________________
Juan Orozco, Mayor
ATTEST :
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Attachment 6
Page 487 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 1
Finance and IT Department
TITLE:
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES
CATEGORY: BUDGET ADOPTION LEVEL:
CITY COUNCIL DATE:
POLICY NO.: B-001 ENABLING RESOLUTION
(resolution no)
Policy Resolution
No. _____
Authorizing Signature ORIGINALLY ADOPTED 11/20/2013
REVISED 6/16/2021
POLICY COMMITTEE 6/9/2021
DEPARTMENT HEAD (signature date)
CITY OF UKIAH FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES
Table of Contents
A. General Financial Goals ..................................................................................................................... 2
B. Budget Administration ...................................................................................................................... 2
C. General Revenue Management ........................................................................................................ 4
D. Utility Rates and Fees ........................................................................................................................ 4
E. Investments ....................................................................................................................................... 5
F. Expenditures ..................................................................................................................................... 5
G. Equipment Replacement Funds ........................................................................................................ 5
H. Capital Improvement Program ......................................................................................................... 6
I. Debt Management ............................................................................................................................ 6
L. Human Resources Management ....................................................................................................... 9
Page 488 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 2
A. General Financial Goals
The general financial goals of the City of Ukiah are:
A.1. To maintain a financially viable City that provides an adequate level of municipal services.
A.2. To maintain financial flexibility to be able to continually adapt to local and regional
economic changes.
A.3. To maintain and enhance the sound fiscal condition of the City.
B. Budget Administration
B.1. The City will strive to adopt a balanced budget by June 30 preceding the fiscal year. A
balanced budget means that operating revenues and other financing sources must fully
cover operating expenditures, including debt service, as set forth in B.6. below. A balanced
budget allows for total expenditures to exceed revenues and other financing sources;
however, beginning fund balance and strategic reserve funds should only be used to fund
capital improvement projects or other one-time, non-recurring expenditures, as set forth in
B.10. below.
B.2. The City will prepare a budget calendar no later than January 15 preceding the budget
period.
B.3. The City will use a budget development process based primarily on best practices as
promulgated by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) that emphasizes long-
range planning and effective program management. The process will:
a. Reinforce the importance of long-range planning in managing the City's fiscal
affairs.
b. Focus on developing and budgeting for the accomplishment of significant goals.
c. Establish realistic timeframes for achieving goals.
d. Create a proactive budget that provides for stable operations and assures the
City's long-term fiscal health.
e. Promote orderly spending patterns.
B.4. During the budget development process, the existing budget will be thoroughly examined to
ensure City services deemed necessary and desirable by the City Council are planned and
delivered effectively and efficiently.
B.5. The City will avoid budgetary and accounting practices that balance the current budget at
the expense of future budgets.
Page 489 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 3
B.6. The City will strive to support current operating expenditures, including debt service, with
current revenues.
B.7. The City will forecast its revenues and expenditures for each of the succeeding five years
and will update this forecast at least annually.
B.8. The status of major program goals will be formally reported to the City Council on a
periodic, ongoing basis.
B.9. Budget amendments and adjustments. Budgetary control is maintained at the following
levels:
a. The City Council maintains budgetary control for the entire overall City budget. It
will review and amend appropriations regularly as needed to any budgeted fund,
with the following exceptions:
i. The City Manager maintains budgetary control at the fund level. The City
Manager may approve and adjust the budget within any budgeted fund so long
as the net appropriation to the fund is not increased, e.g., an increase to a
budget line item or account is offset by a commensurate reduction to a different
budget line item or account.
ii. The Finance Director, or designee, maintains budgetary control at the line item,
object, or account level. The Finance Director may approve and adjust the
budget within objects, e.g. between a parent object account and a project sub-
object account. Also, the Finance Director may approve budget adjustments
that result in a total increase to a fund budget so long as a commensurate
revenue amount is recognized, e.g. an expenditure is reimbursed by a third-
party (reimbursable jobs).
B.10. The City will strive to preserve the spending of fund balance and strategic reserve funds for
capital improvement projects, or other one-time, non-recurring expenditures. Non-
recurring expenditures are defined here as those that do not regularly recur beyond a stated
limited amount of time, e.g. beyond three years, as recommended by the City Manager and
approved by the City Council.
B.11. Unspent, unencumbered operating and capital improvement program appropriations will
lapse at the end of the budget period. Requests for lapsed program appropriations may be
resubmitted for inclusion in the subsequent fiscal year. Unspent but encumbered
appropriations at the end of a fiscal year shall amend the budget of the subsequent fiscal
year. The Finance Department shall execute this amendment as part of its year-end closing
procedures.
Page 490 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 4
C. General Revenue Management
C.1. The City will seek to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base to protect it from short -
term fluctuations in any one revenue source.
C.2. To emphasize and facilitate long-range financial planning, the City shall strive to maintain
current projections of revenues for the succeeding five years.
C.3. Because revenues, especially those of the General Fund, are sensitive to both local and
regional economic conditions, revenue estimates adopted by the City Council should be
conservative and based primarily on best practices promulgated by GFOA.
C.4. The City will annually review the General Fund operating position (revenues less
expenditures) to determine if funds are available to operate and maintain future capital
facilities. If funding is not available for operations and maintenance expenditures, the City
will evaluate all viable options.
C.5. User fees will be reviewed and updated on a periodic basis to recover the full cost of
services provided, except when the City Council determines that a subsidy from the General
Fund is within the cost recovery policy adopted by the Council. The City will strive to
establish a master fee schedule that will encompass all fees and charges of the City and
make that fee schedule publicly available.
C.6. Any transfers between funds for operating purposes shall be clearly set forth in the Adopted
Budget. These operating transfers, under which financial resources are transferred from one
fund to another, are distinctly different from interfund borrowings, which are usually made
for temporary cash flow reasons and are not intended to result in a transfer of financial
resources by the end of the fiscal year. From time to time, interfund borrowings may be
appropriate but are subject to the following criteria and in accordance with the City’s
adopted Debt Management Policy:
a. The Finance Director is authorized to approve temporary interfund borrowings
for cash flow purposes whenever the cash shortfall is expected to be resolved
within 60 days or the next fiscal year. The most common use of interfund
borrowing under this circumstance is for grant programs where costs are
incurred before drawdowns are initiated and received.
b. Interfund advances or other long-term interfund borrowing exceeding one year
in maturity can be executed by the Finance Director, pursuant to any applicable
law, and shall subsequently be reported to the City Council.
D. Utility Rates and Fees
D.1. The City will set utility rates and user fees at levels that fully recover the total direct and
indirect costs of the activity. Direct costs include the costs of operations, including the
maintenance of facilities, capital outlay, debt service and annual depreciation of capital
Page 491 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 5
assets. Indirect costs include those associated with administrative allocations and internal
services used.
D.2. The City shall review and adjust utility rates and user charges as required no less than once
every five years to ensure that they remain appropriate and equitable.
E. Investments
E.1. The Finance Director will annually submit an investment policy to the City Council for review
and adoption.
E.2. Under the guidance of the City's Investment Oversight Committee, the Finance Director will
invest the City's idle monies with an outside investment advisor in accordance with
applicable law and adopted investment policies and direct the investment of bond or note
monies on deposit with a trustee or fiscal agent in accordance with the applicable indenture
or issuance document.
F. Expenditures
F.1. The City will strive to maintain a level of expenditures that will provide for the public well-
being and safety of the residents of the community.
F.2. The City will strive to provide a level of expenditure that will maintain its assets.
F.3. The City will maintain purchasing methods in accordance with law and the City's adopted
purchasing policies and procedures to secure the most competitive price consistent with the
highest quality desirable for use intended and the needs of the City.
F.4. The City Council will annually adopt a resolution establishing the City' s appropriations limit
calculated in accordance with Article Xlll-8 of the Constitution of the State of California,
Section 7900 of the State of California Government Code, and any other voter approved
amendments or state legislation that affects the City's appropriations limit. The Council will
generally consider this resolution in connection with final approval of the City's budget.
G. Equipment Replacement Funds
G.1. The City will maintain a General Government Equipment Replacement Fund (Fund 220) for
governmental funds and equipment replacement funds for each proprietary fund where
appropriate and desirable to provide for the timely replacement of vehicles, equipment,
network and computer, and other short-lived capital assets.
G.2. The City will strive to make an annual contribution to these funds based on the annual use
allowance, which is determined by the estimated life of the vehicles or equipment to be
replaced and their original purchase costs.
Page 492 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 6
G.3. Interest earnings and sales of surplus equipment as well as any related damage and
insurance recoveries will be credited to the funds in which the asset was capitalized
(proprietary funds) or from which the original capital expenditure was incurred.
H. Capital Improvement Program
H.1. The City will develop a five-year capital improvement program (CIP) each budget cycle. The
purpose of the CIP is to systematically plan, schedule and finance capital projects to ensure
cost-effectiveness as well as conformance with the City's established policies.
H.2. Questions to consider when prioritizing a capital project include:
a. Is it mandated?
b. Is there an emergency need?
c. Is there a direct or indirect economic benefit?
d. Is there full or partial funding?
e. Does it detail with other capital projects that are a priority for other reasons?
f. How does it fit in with the City Council's strategic goals?
H.3. The City will identify the estimated costs, potential funding sources, and project schedule for
each capital project proposal in the CIP before it is submitted to the City Council for
approval.
H.4. The City will coordinate the development of the CIP with the development of the operating
budget.
H.5. Construction projects that cost $20,000 or more and equipment purchases that cost
$10,000 or more will be included in the CIP, except for replacements of police squad cars
which are included in the operating program budget. Minor capital construction outlays of
less than $20,000 and minor equipment purchases of less than $10,000 will be included in
the operating program budgets.
H.6. The City will make all capital improvements in accordance with an adopted and funded CIP.
H.7. Cost tracking procedures for current-period components of the CIP will be implemented and
updated quarterly to ensure project completion is within budget and established timelines.
I. Debt Management
I.1. The City will consider the use of debt financing in accordance with its Debt Management
Policy and when determined reasonable and cost-effective, notably for high-priority, non-
recurring capital improvement projects and only under the following circumstances:
Page 493 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 7
a. When the project's useful life will exceed or equal the term of financing, and;
b. When projected revenues or specific resources will be sufficient to service the
long-term debt.
I.2. Debt financing should not be considered appropriate for any recurring purpose such as
current operating and maintenance expenditures. The issuance of short-term instruments
such as revenue, tax or bond anticipation notes is excluded from this limitation.
I.3. The City will carefully monitor its level of debt because debt capacity is limited. Funds
borrowed for a project today are not available to fund other projects tomorrow, and funds
committed for debt repayment today are not available to fund operations tomorrow.
I.4. A feasibility analysis will be prepared for each long-term financing which analyzes the
impact on current and future budgets for debt service and operations. This analysis will also
address the reliability of revenues to support debt service.
I.5. The City will diligently monitor its compliance with bond covenants and ensure its
adherence to federal arbitrage regulations.
I.6. The City will maintain good, ongoing communications with bond rating agencies about the
City' s financial condition.
I.7. Periodic reviews of all outstanding debt will be undertaken to determine refinancing
opportunities. Refinancing will be considered under the following conditions:
a. There is a net economic benefit.
b. It is needed to modernize covenants that are adversely affecting the City's
financial position or operations.
c. The City wants to reduce the principal outstanding in order to achieve future
debt service savings, and it has available working capital to do so from other
sources.
J. Fund Balance and Reserves
J.1. The City shall strive to maintain a unassigned fund balance in the General Fund, including
the General Fund's Strategic Reserve Fund, of at least 25 percent of General Fund operating
expenditures. A 25-percent fund balance is equivalent to approximately three months of
operating expenditures. The primary purpose of this minimum fund balance is to meet cash
flow requirements; to protect the City's essential service programs and funding
requirements during periods of economic uncertainty, local disasters, other financial
hardships or downturns in the local economy; and to provide for unforeseen operating or
capital needs. Additionally, a fund balance of 25 percent is considered the minimum level
Page 494 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 8
necessary to maintain the City's credit worthiness and is consistent with GFOA best
practices.
J.2. The City Council may assign specific fund balance levels for future development of capital
projects that it has determined to be in the best long-term interests of the City.
J.3. The City's enterprise funds shall strive to maintain a minimum working capital balance
(defined as current assets minus current liabilities) of at least 25 percent of operating
J.4.
J.5. expenditures. The primary purpose of this balance is to set aside funds to maintain cash
balances sufficient to pay expenses as needed and to provide for unanticipated or
emergency expenses that could not be reasonably foreseen during the preparation of the
budget.
J.6. In addition to the designated balances noted above, levels of fund balance and working
capital will be sufficient to meet:
a. Debt service covenants and reserve requirements.
b. Reserves for encumbrances.
c. Established rate stabilization reserves.
d. Funding requirements for projects approved in prior years that are carried
forward.
e. Credit worthiness standards or requirements.
f. Other assignments required by contractual obligations, state law, generally
accepted accounting principles, or GFOA best practices.
K. Accounting, Auditing and Financial Reporting
K.1. The City's accounting and financial reporting systems will be maintained in conformance
with generally accepted accounting principles and standards of the Governmental
Accounting Standards Board.
K.2. A capital asset system will be maintained to identify all City assets, their historical cost, and
useful life. Consistent with the accompanying policies set forth for the City's Capital
Improvement Program, the capitalization threshold for capital assets is a minimum two-year
lifespan and total initial cost of $10,000.
K.3. An annual audit will be performed by an independent public accounting firm with the
subsequent issue of, at a minimum, General Purpose Financial Statements that include an
Page 495 of 550
Exhibit A
Page | 9
audit opinion. The City shall strive to issue audited financial statements within 180 days
after year-end.
L. Human Resources Management
L.1. The City Council shall establish and authorize all regular positions, including part-time,
seasonal, and extra-help regular positions through the budget process. The City Manager is
authorized to hire limited-term extra-help positions when needed and necessary. The City
Manager also is authorized to over-hire for positions where vacancies are expected or
imminent during the fiscal year to mitigate service disruption.
L.2. The budget will fully appropriate the resources needed for authorized regular positions and
will limit programs to the regular staffing authorized.
L.3. The City will strive to provide competitive compensation and benefits for its authorized
regular employees. Market adjustments may be made by the City Council upon
recommendation by the City Manager.
L.4. All request for additional regular positions will include evaluations of:
a. The necessity, benefits, term and expected results of the proposed activity.
b. Staffing and materials costs including salary, benefits, equipment, uniforms,
support, and facilities and related funding requirements.
c. Alternative means of service delivery, with consideration given to quality of
service.
d. Additional revenues or cost savings that may be realized.
Page 496 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 1
Finance
and IT
Department
TITLE:
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES
CATEGORY: BUDGET ADOPTION LEVEL:
DEPARTMENT DATE:
POLICY NO.: B-001 ENABLING RESOLUTION
(resolution no) N/A
Authorizing Signature ORIGINALLY ADOPTED (adoption date)
REVISED (adoption date)
POLICY COMMITTEE (approval date)
DEPARTMENT HEAD (signature date)
CITY OF UKIAH FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES
Table of Contents
A. General Financial Goals ..................................................................................................................... 2
B. Budget Administration ...................................................................................................................... 2
C. General Revenue Management ...................................................................................................... 44
D. Utility Rates and Fees ...................................................................................................................... 54
E. Investments ..................................................................................................................................... 55
F. Expenditures ................................................................................................................................... 55
G. Equipment Replacement Funds ...................................................................................................... 55
H. Capital Improvement Program ....................................................................................................... 66
I. Debt Management .......................................................................................................................... 76
L. Human Resources Management ..................................................................................................... 99
Page 497 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 2
A. General Financial Goals
The general financial goals of the City of Ukiah are:
A.1. To maintain a financially viable City that provides an adequate level of municipal services.
A.2. To maintain financial flexibility in order toto be able to continually adapt to local and
regional economic changes.
A.3. To maintain and enhance the sound fiscal condition of the City.
B. Budget Administration
B.1. The City will strive to adopt a balanced budget by June 30 preceding the budget periodfiscal
year. A balanced budget means that operating revenues and other financing sources must
fully cover operating expenditures, including debt service, as set forth in B.6. below. A
balanced budget allows for total expenditures to exceed revenues and other financing
sources; however, beginning fund balance and strategic reserve funds can should only be
used to fund capital improvement projects or other one-time, non-recurring expenditures,
as set forth in B.10. below.
B.2. The City will prepare a budget calendar no later than January 15 preceding the budget
period.
B.3. The City will use a budget development process based in primarily on best practices as
promulgated by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) that emphasizes long-
range planning and effective program management. The process will:
a. Reinforce the importance of long-range planning in managing the City's fiscal
affairs.
b. Focus on developing and budgeting for the accomplishment of significant goals.
c. Establish realistic timeframes for achieving goals.
d. Create a proactive budget that provides for stable operations and assures the
City's long-term fiscal health.
e. Promote orderly spending patterns.
B.4. During the budget development process, the existing budget will be thoroughly examined to
enassure removal or reduction of any services or programs that could be eliminated or
reduced in costCity services deemed necessary and desirable by the City Council are planned
and delivered effectively and efficiently.
Page 498 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 3
B.5. The City will avoid budgetary and accounting procedures practices that balance the current
budget at the expense of future budgets.
B.6. The City will strive to support current operating expenditures, including debt service, with
current revenues.
B.7. The City will forecast its revenues and expenditures for each of the succeeding five years
and will update this forecast at least annually.
B.8. The status of major program goals will be formally reported to the City Council on a
periodic, ongoing basis.
B.9. Budget amendments and adjustments. Budgetary control is maintained at the following
levels:
a. The City Council maintains budgetary control for the entire overall City budget. It
will review and amend appropriations regularly as needed, if necessary, on a
periodic, ongoing basis. to any budgeted fund, with the following exceptions:
i. The City Manager maintains budgetary control at the fund level. The City
Manager may approve and adjust the budget within any budgeted fund so long
as the net appropriation to the fund is not increased, e.g., an increase to a
budget line item or account is offset by a commensurate reduction to a different
budget line item or account.
ii. The Finance Director, or designee, maintains budgetary control at the line item,
object, or account level. The Finance Director may approve and adjust the
budget within objects, e.g. between a parent object account and a project sub-
object account. Also, the Finance Director may approve budget adjustments
that result in a total increase to a fund budget so long as a commensurate
revenue amount is recognized, e.g. an expenditure is reimbursed by a third-
party (reimbursable jobs).
B.9.B.10. The City will strive to preserve the spending of fund balance and strategic reserve funds
for capital improvement projects, or other one-time, non-recurring expenditures. Non-
recurring expenditures are defined here as those that do not regularly recur beyond a stated
limited amount of time, e.g. beyond three years, as recommended by the City Manager and
approved by the City Council.
B.10.B.11. Unspent, unencumbered operating and capital improvement program appropriations
will lapse at the end of the budget period. Requests for lapsed program appropriations may
be resubmitted for inclusion in the subsequent budget periodfiscal year. Unspent but
encumbered appropriations at the end of a fiscal year the budget period shall amend the
budget of the subsequent period fiscal yearby means of a budget amendment approved by
the City Council. The Finance Department shall execute this amendment as part of its year-
end closing procedures.
Page 499 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 4
C. General Revenue Management
C.1. The City will seek to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base to protect it from short -
term fluctuations in any one revenue source.
C.2. To emphasize and facilitate long-range financial planning, the City will shall strive to
maintain current projections of revenues for the succeeding five years.
C.3. Because revenues, especially those of the General Fund, are sensitive to both local and
regional economic conditions, revenue estimates adopted by the City Council must should
be conservative and based primarily on best practices promulgated by GFOA.
C.4. The City will annually review the General Fund operating position (revenues less
expenditures) to determine if funds are available to operate and maintain future capital
facilities. If funding is not available for operations and maintenance expensesexpenditures,
the City will evaluate all viable options.
C.5. User fees will be reviewed and updated on a periodic basis to recover the full cost of
services provided, except when the City Council determines that a subsidy from the General
Fund is within the cost recovery policy adopted by the Council. The City will strive to
establish a master fee schedule that will encompass all fees and charges of the City and
make that fee schedule publicly available.
C.6. Any transfers between funds for operating purposes shall be clearly set forth in the Adopted
Budget. These operating transfers, under which financial resources are transferred from one
fund to another, are distinctly different from interfund borrowings, which are usually made
for temporary cash flow reasons and are not intended to result in a transfer of financial
resources by the end of the fiscal year. From time to time, interfund borrowings may be
appropriate but are subject to the following criteria and in accordance with the City’s
adopted Debt Management Policy:
a. The Finance Director is authorized to approve temporary interfund borrowings
for cash flow purposes whenever the cash shortfall is expected to be resolved
within 60 days or the next fiscal year. The most common use of interfund
borrowing under this circumstance is for grant programs where costs are
incurred before drawdowns are initiated and received.
b. Any other interfund borrowings for cash flow or other purposes require
approval byInterfund advances or other long-term interfund borrowing
exceeding one year in maturity can be executed by the Finance Director,
pursuant to any applicable law, and shall subsequently be reported to the City
Council.
Page 500 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 5
D. Utility Rates and Fees
D.1. The City will set utility rates and user fees at levels that fully recover the total direct and
indirect costs of the activity. Indirect Direct costs include the costs of operations,
inclduingincluding the maintenacemaintenance of facilitesfacilities , capital outlay, debt
service and annual depreciation of capital assets. Indirect costs include those associated
with administrative allocations and internal services used.
D.2. The City will shall review and adjust utility rates and user charges as required no less than
once every five years to ensure that they remain appropriate and equitable.
E. Investments
E.1. The Finance Director will annually submit an investment policy to the City Council for review
and adoption.
E.2. Under the guidance of the City's Investment Oversight Committee, the Finance Director will
invest the City's idle monies with an outside investment advisor in accordance with
applicable law and adopted investment policies and direct the investment of bond or note
monies on deposit with a trustee or fiscal agent in accordance with the applicable indenture
or issuance document .
F. Expenditures
F.1. The City will strive to maintain a level of expenditures that will provide for the public well-
being and safety of the residents of the community.
F.2. The City will strive to provide a level of expenditure s that will maintain the publicits assets.
F.3. The City will maintain purchasing methods, in accordance with law and the City's adopted
purchasing policies and procedures to secure the lo westmost competitive price consistent
with the highest quality desirable for use intended and the needs of the City.
F.4. The City Council will annually adopt a resolution establishing the City' s appropriations limit
calculated in accordance with Article Xlll-8 of the Constitution of the State of California,
Section 7900 of the State of California Government Code, and any other voter approved
amendments or state legislation that affects the City's appropriations limit . The Council will
generally consider this resolution in connection with final approval of the City' s budget.
G. Equipment Replacement Funds
G.1. The City will maintain a General Government Equipment Replacement Fund (Fund 220) for
governmental funds and a and equipment replacement funds Utilities Equipment
Replacement Fund for each utility proprietary fund where appropriate and desirable to
Page 501 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 6
provide for the timely replacement of vehicles, equipment, network and computer,
information technology, and other short-lived capital equipmentassets.
G.2. The City will strive to make an annual contribution to these funds based on the annual use
allowance, which is determined by the estimated life of the vehicles or equipment to be
replaced and their original purchase costs.
G.3. Interest earnings and sales of surplus equipment as well as any related damage and
insurance recoveries will be credited to the Equipment Replacement Fundsfunds in which
the asset was capitalized (proprietary funds) or from which the original capital expenditure
was incurred.
H. Capital Improvement Program
H.1. The City will develop a five-year capital improvement program (CIP) each budget cycle. The
purpose of the CIP is to systematically plan, schedule and finance capital projects to ensure
cost-effectiveness as well as conformance with the City's established policies.
H.2. Questions to consider when prioritizing a capital project include:
a. Is it mandated?
b. Is there an emergency need?
c. Is there a direct or indirect economic benefit?
d. Is there full or partial funding?
e. Does it detail with other capital projects that are a priority for other reasons?
f. How does it fit in with the City Council's strategic goals?
H.3. The City will identify the estimated costs, potential funding sources, and project schedule for
each capital project proposal in the CIP before it is submitted to the City Council for
approval.
H.4. The City will coordinate the development of the CIP with the development of the operating
budget.
H.5. Construction projects that cost $20,000 or more and equipment purchases that cost
H.6.H.5. $10,000 or more will be included in the CIP, except for replacements of police squad cars
which are included in the operating program budget. Minor capital construction outlays of
less than $20,000 and minor equipment purchases of less than $10,000 will be included in
the operating program budgets.
H.7.H.6.The City will make all capital improvements in accordance with an adopted and funded CIP.
Page 502 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 7
H.8.H.7.Cost tracking procedures for current-period components of the CIP will be implemented and
updated quarterly to ensure project completion is within budget and established timelines.
I. Debt Management
I.1. The City will consider the use of debt financing in accordance with its Debt Management
Policy and when determined reasonable and cost-effective, onlynotably for high-priority,
one-timenon-recurring capital improvement projects and only under the following
circumstances:
a. When the project's useful life will exceed or equal the term of financing, and;
b. When projected revenues or specific resources will be sufficient to service the
long- termlong-term debt.
I.2. Debt financing will should not be considered appropriate for any recurring purpose such as
current operating and maintenance expenditures. The issuance of short-term instruments
such as revenue, tax or bond anticipation notes is excluded from this limitation.
I.3. The City will carefully monitor its level of debt because debt capacity is limited. Funds
borrowed for a project today are not available to fund other projects tomorrow, and funds
committed for debt repayment today are not available to fund operations tomorrow.
I.4. A feasibility analysis will be prepared for each long-term financing which analyzes the
impact on current and future budgets for debt service and operations. This analysis will also
address the reliability of revenues to support debt service.
I.5. The City will diligently monitor its compliance with bond covenants and ensure its
adherence to federal arbitrage regulations.
I.6. The City will maintain good, ongoing communications with bond rating agencies about the
City' s financial condition.
I.7. Periodic reviews of all outstanding debt will be undertaken to determine refinancing
opportunities. Refinancing will be considered under the following conditions:
a. There is a net economic benefit.
b. It is needed to modernize covenants that are adversely affecting the City's
financial position or operations.
c. The City wants to reduce the principal outstanding in order to achieve future
debt service savings, and it has available working capital to do so from other
sources.
J. Fund Balance and Reserves
Page 503 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 8
J.1. The City will shall strive to maintain a unassigned fund balance in the General Fund,
including the General Fund's Strategic Reserve Fund, of at least 25 percent of General Fund
operating expenditures. A 25-percent fund balance is equivalent to approximately three
months of
J.2.J.1. operating expenditures. The primary purpose of this minimum fund balance is to meet cash
flow requirements;, to protect the City's essential service programs and funding
requirements during periods of economic uncertainty, local disasters, other financial
hardships or downturns in the local economy;, and to provide for unforeseen operating or
capital needs. Additionally, a fund balance of 25 percent is considered the minimum level
necessary to maintain the City's credit worthiness and is consistent with to meet GFOA best
practices.
J.3.J.2. The City Council may assign specific fund balance levels for future development of capital
projects that it has determined to be in the best long-term interests of the City.
J.3. The City's enterprise funds will shall strive to maintain a minimum working capital balance
(defined as current assets minus current liabilities) of at least 25 percent of operating
J.4.
J.4.J.5. expensesexpenditures. The primary purpose of this balance is to set aside funds to maintain
cash balances sufficient to pay expenses as needed and to provide for unanticipated or
emergency expenses that could not be reasonably foreseen during the preparation of the
budget.
J.5.J.6. In addition to the assigneddesignated balances noted above, levels of fund balance and
working capitaland retained earnings will be sufficient to meet:
a. Debt service covenants and reserve requirements.
b. Reserves for encumbrances.
c. Established rate stabilization reserves.
d. Funding requirements for projects approved in prior years that are carried
forward.
d.e. Credit worthiness standards or requirements.
e.f. Other assignments required by contractual obligations, state law , or generally
accepted accounting principles, or GFOA best practices.
Page 504 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 9
K. Accounting, Auditing and Financial Reporting
K.1. The City's accounting and financial reporting systems will be maintained in conformance
with generally accepted accounting principles and standards of the Governmental
Accounting Standards Board.
K.2. A fixed capital asset s system will be maintained to identify all City assets, their historical
cost, and useful life. Consistent with the accompanying policies set forth for the City's
Capital Improvement Program, the dollar threshold for fixed assets will increase from
$5,000 to $10,000 effective July 1, 2014.the capitalization threshold for capital assets is a
minimum two year lifespan and total initial cost of $10,000.
K.3. At the beginning of the annua l bud get preparation cycle, a financial review will be
submitted to the City Council and will be made available to the public.
K.4. Full and continuing disclosure will be provided in the general financial statement s and bond
representations.
K.5.K.3. An annual audit will be performed by an independent public accounting firm with the
subsequent issue of, at a minimum, General Purpose Financial Statements that include an
audit opinion. The City will shall strive to issue audited financial statements within 180 days
after year-end.
L. Human Resources Management
L.1. The City Council will shall authorize establish and authorize all regular positions, including
part -time, seasonal, and extra-help regular positions through the budget process. The City
Manager is authorized to hire limited-term extra-help positions when needed and
necessary. The City Manager also is authorized to over-hire for positions where vacancies
are expected or imminent during the fiscal year to mitigate service disruption.
L.2. The budget will fully appropriate the resources needed for authorized regular positions and
will limit programs to the regular staffing authorized.
L.3. The City will strive to provide competitive compensation and benefits for its authorized
regular employees. Market adjustments may be made by the City Council upon
recommendation by the City Manager.
L.4. All request for additional regular positions will include evaluations of:
a. The necessity, benefits, term and expected results of the proposed activity.
b. Staffing and materials costs including salary, benefits, equipment, uniforms,
support, and facilities and related funding requirements.
Page 505 of 550
Attachment 7 - DRAFT
Page | 10
c. Alternative means of service deliver y, with consideration given to quality of
service.
d. Additional revenues or cost savings that may be realized.
Page 506 of 550
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-________XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING THE CITY OF UKIAH DEBT
MANAGEMENT POLICY
WHEREAS, the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of Ukiah (the “City”) recognizes that cost-effective access
to the capital markets depends on prudent management of the City’s debt program; and
WHEREAS, Government Code section 8855(i) requires any issuer of public debt to provide to California Debt
and Investment Advisory Commission (CDIAC) no later than 30 days prior to the sale of any debt issue a report of the
proposed issuance (the “Report of Proposed Debt Issuance”), and must certify on the Report of Proposed Debt Issuance
that they have adopted local debt policies concerning the use of debt and that the proposed debt issuance is consistent
with those policies (the “CDIAC Requirements”); and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to set parameters for issuing debt, managing the debt portfolio and
providing guidance to decision makers; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that adoption of the attached amended Debt Management
Policy (the “Debt Management Policy”) will help ensure that debt is issued and managed prudently in order to maintain
sound fiscal policy, and is in compliance with the CDIAC Requirements; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby orders and determines
as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The Council hereby specifically finds and declares that each of the recitals set forth
above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated in conjunction with the respective staff report.
Section 2. Approval of the Debt Management Policy. This Council hereby declares that the proposed
amended Debt Management Policy attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby approved as the City of Ukiah Debt
Management Policy to be effective upon adoption of this Resolution.
Section 3. Approval of the Debt Management Policy. That the issuance of debt functions is delegated to
the Finance Director’s Office as set forth in the amended Debt Management Policy, with final authorization of such new
debt issuance by the City Council as applicable.
Section 4. Authorization to Manage Debt Issuance Functions. The Finance Director is hereby authorized
to manage debt issuance functions for the City of Ukiah in accordance with the Debt Management Policy.
Section 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption.
The foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ukiah held on the
on the 16th day of June, 2021 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
_____________________
Juan Orozco, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Attachment 8
Page 507 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH
Debt Management Policy
JUNE 16, 2021
CITY OF UKIAH, CA
EXHIBIT A
Attachment 8
Page 508 of 550
Finance and IT Department
TITLE:
DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
CATEGORY: ACCOUNTING AND
REPORTING
ADOPTION LEVEL:
CITY COUNCIL DATE:
POLICY NO.: AR-002 ENABLING
RESOLUTION
(resolution no)
N/A
Authorizing
Signature ORIGINALLY
ADOPTED 2/15/2017
REVISED 6/16/2021
POLICY COMMITTEE 6/9/2021
DEPARTMENT HEAD (signature date)
Table of Contents
Section 1: Policy .............................................................................................................................................. 2
Section 2: Scope ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Section 3: Objectives ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Section 4: Delegation Authority........................................................................................................................ 3
Section 5: Methods of Financing ...................................................................................................................... 3
Section 6: Structure and Term .......................................................................................................................... 5
Section 7: Method of Issuance and Sale; Disclosure ........................................................................................... 6
Section 8: Creditworthiness Objectives ............................................................................................................. 8
Section 9: Post Issuance Administration ............................................................................................................ 9
Section 10: Training....................................................................................................................................... 10
Section 11: Glossary ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Attachment 8
Page 509 of 550
Section 1: Policy
This Debt Management Policy sets forth debt management objectives for the City of Ukiah and its component units
for which the City Council acts as legislative body, and the term “City” shall refer to each of such entities.
This Debt Management Policy establishes general parameters for issuing and administering debt. Recognizing that
cost-effective access to the capital markets depends on prudent management of the Debt Program, the City
Council has adopted this Debt Management Policy by resolution.
This Debt Management Policy is intended to comply with California Government Code Section 8855(i) and SB 1029
(2016).
Section 2: Scope
The guidelines established by this policy will govern the issuance and management of all debt funded for long term
capital financing needs and not for general operating functions. When used in this policy, “debt” refers to all forms
of indebtedness and financing lease obligations. The Finance Department recognizes that changes in the capital
markets and other unforeseen circumstances may require action that deviates from this Debt Management Policy.
In cases that require exceptions to this Debt Management Policy, approval from the City Council will be necessary
for implementation.
Section 3: Objectives
The purpose of this Debt Management Policy is to assist the City in pursuit of the following equally important
objectives, while providing full and complete financial disclosure and ensuring compliance with applicable state
and federal laws:
•Minimize debt service and issuance costs;
•Maintain access to cost effective borrowing
•Achieve the highest practical credit rating
•Ensure full and timely repayment of debt
•Maintain full and complete financial disclosure and reporting
•Ensure compliance with applicable state and federal laws
Budget Integration – The decision to incur new indebtedness should be integrated with the policy decisions
embedded in the City Council-adopted annual Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Program Budget. The
annual debt service payments shall be included in the Operating Budget.
The City will integrate its debt issuances with the goals of its Capital Improvement Program by timing the issuance
of debt to ensure that projects and related funding are available when needed in furtherance of the City’s public
purposes. The City will seek to issue debt in a timely manner to avoid having to make unplanned expenditures for
capital improvements or equipment from its general fund.
Review – Recognizing that cost-effective access to the capital market depends on prudent management of the
City’s debt program, a regular review of the debt policy should be performed. The debt policy will be included as
an Appendix in the annual Budget adopted by City Council. Any substantive changes to the policy shall be brought
to the City Council for consideration and approval as part of the annual budget process.
Attachment 8
Page 510 of 550
Section 4: Delegation Authority
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 37209 and 40805.5 of the Government Code of the State of California, the
Finance Director shall be responsible for all of the financial affairs of the City. This Debt Management Policy grants
the Finance Director the authority, subject to the budget integration as discussed above, to select the financing
team, coordinate the administration and issuance of debt, communicate with the rating agencies, and fulfill all of
the pre-issuance and post-issuance requirements imposed by or related to state law, federal tax law and federal
securities law.
Financing Team Definitions and Roles – The financing team is the working group of City staff and outside
consultants necessary to complete a debt issuance including but not limited to bond counsel, disclosure counsel,
underwriter, municipal financial advisor, trustee, pricing consultant and/or arbitrage analyst.
Typically, the Finance Director, the City Attorney, the City Manager, and appropriate Department Head(s) form the
City staff portion of the Financing Team. Other staff members or designees may be appointed to the Financing
Team.
Consultant Selection – The City will consider the professional qualifications and experience of consultants as it
relates to the specific bond issue or other financing under consideration in accordance and pursuant to the City’s
Municipal Code and purchasing policies.
Section 5: Methods of Financing
The Finance Director will investigate all possible financing alternatives including, but not limited to bonds, loans,
state bond pools, and grants. The City also has an impact fee program whereby new development pays its fair
share for the increased capital and operating costs that result from new construction. Although impact fee
payments are restricted to specific projects or types of projects, the use of these payments can be an important
source of financing for certain capital projects.
Cash Funding – The City funds a significant portion of capital improvements from reserves accumulated from one-
time revenues, which have been set aside for investment in the City’s infrastructure.
Inter-fund Borrowing – The City may borrow internally from other funds with surplus cash in lieu of issuing bonded
debt. Purposes warranting the use of this type of borrowing could include short term cash flow imbalances,
interim financing pending the issuance of bonds, or long term financing in lieu of bonds for principal amounts of
under $10 million. The City funds from which the money is borrowed may be repaid with interest based upon the
earning rate of the City’s investment portfolio. The Finance Director shall also exercise due diligence to ensure
that it is financially prudent for the fund making the loan.
Inter-fund loans will be evaluated on a case by case basis by the Finance Department. Short-term borrowing for
cash flow purposes, expected to be repaid within the next operating (budget) cycle, shall be authorized and
executed by the Finance Director.
Any long-term borrowing (advances) between two City funds, with full maturity not expected within the
succeeding fiscal year and where interest is charged by one fund and incurred by the other, may require approval
by City Council by resolution. The Finance Director is authorized to execute advances between funds when and
where appropriate and necessary for cash flow or intermediate financial planning purposes. The purpose of inter-
fund borrowing includes financing high priority needs and to reduce costs of interest, debt issuance and/or
administration.
Attachment 8
Page 511 of 550
Bank Loans / Lines of Credit – Although the City does not typically utilize lines of credit for the financing of capital
projects, financial institution credit is an option for municipal issuers and may be evaluated as a financing option.
Other Loans – The City will evaluate other loan programs, including but not limited to State loans such as the
Water Resources Control Board’s revolving fund loans for the construction of water infrastructure projects.
Bond Financing – The City may issue any bonds which are allowed under federal and state law including but not
limited to general obligation bonds, certificates of participation, revenue bonds, land-secured (assessment and
special tax) bonds, refunding bonds and special tax bonds (see below for detail).
General Obligation Bonds – General Obligation Bonds (GO Bonds) may only be issued with two-thirds approval of
the City’s registered voters. The California State Constitution (Article XVI, Section 18) limits the use of the
proceeds from GO Bonds to “the acquisition or improvement of real property”. Parks and Public Safety facilities
are examples of the type of facilities that could be financed with GO Bonds. City Council must approve placement
of such GO Bonds on the ballot.
Lease Financings – Lease financings may take a variety of forms, including certificates of participation, lease
revenue bonds and direct leases (typically for equipment). When the City finances acquisition or construction of
capital improvements or equipment with a lease financing, the City agrees to lease either the financed asset or a
different asset and, most commonly, the City’s lease payments are securitized in the form of certificates of
participation or lease revenue bonds. This type of financing requires approval of City Council.
Revenue Bonds – Revenue Bonds are generally issued by the City for enterprise funds that are financially self-
sustaining without the use of taxes and therefore rely on the revenues collected by the enterprise fund to repay
the debt. This type of financing requires approval of City Council.
Assessment Bonds – The Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Streets and Highways Code Section 8500 et seq.) and
other state laws, subject to Article XIIID of the California Constitution, allow the City to issue bonds to finance
improvements that provide “specific benefit” to the assessed real property. Installments are collected on the
secured property tax roll of the County. The City, may also adopt assessment laws that are applicable within its
boundaries. This type of financing is secured by the lien upon and assessments paid by the real property owners
and does not obligate the City’s general fund or other funds. This type of financing requires approval of City
Council.
Special Tax Bonds – Under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, the City may issue bonds on behalf of
a Community Facilities District (CFD) to finance capital facilities, most commonly in connection with new
development. These bonds must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the qualified electors in the CFD, which the
Mello-Roos Act defines to mean registered voters if there are 12 or more registered voters in the CFD and, if there
are fewer than 12 registered voters, the landowners in the CFD. Bonds issued by the City under the Mello-Roos Act
are secured by a special tax on the real property within the CFD. The financed facilities do not need to be
physically located within the CFD. The City may also adopt special tax financing laws that are applicable within its
boundaries. As this type of financing is secured by the special tax lien upon the real property it does not obligate
the City’s general fund or other funds. City Council must approve placement of such Special Tax Bonds on the
ballot.
Refunding Obligations – Pursuant to the Government Code and various other financing statues applicable in
specific situations, the City Council is authorized to provide for the issuance of bonds for the purpose of refunding
any long-term obligation of the City. Absent any significant non-economic factors, a refunding should produce
Attachment 8
Page 512 of 550
minimum net debt service savings (net of reserve fund earnings and other offsets, and taking transaction costs into
account) of at least 3% of the par value of the refunded bonds on a net present value basis, using the refunding
issue’s True Interest Cost (TIC) as the discount rate, unless the Finance Director determines that a lower savings
percentage is acceptable for issues or maturities with short maturity dates. [Additionally, the Finance Director may
determine that there are other, compelling “non-economic” reasons (i.e. removal of onerous covenants, terms or
conditions)]. This type of financing requires approval of the City Council.
Other Obligations – There may be special circumstances when other forms of debt are appropriate and may be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Such other forms include, but are not limited to: bond anticipation notes, grant
anticipation notes, tax allocation bonds, lease revenue bonds, pension obligation bonds, etc. This type of financing
requires approval of the City Council.
Section 6: Structure and Term
Term of Debt – Debt will be structured for the shortest period possible, consistent with a fair allocation of costs to
current and future users. The standard term of long-term debt borrowing is typically 15-30 years.
Consistent with its philosophy of keeping its capital facilities and infrastructure systems in good condition and
maximizing a capital asset’s useful life, the City will make every effort to set aside sufficient current revenues to
finance ongoing maintenance needs and to provide reserves for periodic replacement and renewal. Generally, no
debt will be issued for a period exceeding the useful life or average useful lives of projects to be financed.
Debt Repayment Structure – In structuring a bond issue, the City will manage the amortization of the debt and, to
the extent possible, match its cash flow to the anticipated debt service payments. In addition, the City will seek to
structure debt with aggregate level debt service payments over the life of the debt. Structures with unleveled debt
service will be considered when one or more of the following exist:
• Natural disasters or extraordinary unanticipated external factors make payments on the debt in the early
years prohibitive;
• Such structuring is beneficial to the City’s aggregate overall debt payment schedule;
• Such structuring will allow debt service to more closely match project revenues during the early years of
the project’s operation.
Bond Maturity Options – For each issuance, the City will select serial bonds or term bonds, or both. On the
occasions where circumstances warrant, capital appreciation bonds (CABs) may be used. The decision to use term,
serial or CABs is typically driven by market conditions.
Interest Rate Structure – The City will issue securities on fixed or variable interest rates, which ever will be most
beneficial to the City.
Credit Enhancement – Credit enhancement may be used to improve or establish a credit rating on a City debt
obligation. Types of credit enhancement include letters of credit, bond insurance and surety policies. The Finance
Director will recommend the use of a credit enhancement if it reduces the overall cost of the proposed financing or
if the use of such credit enhancement furthers the City’s overall financial objectives.
Debt Service Reserve Fund – Debt service reserve funds are held by the Trustee to make principal and interest
payments to bondholders in the event the pledged revenues are insufficient to do so. The City will fund debt
service reserve funds when it is in the city’s overall best financial interest. The City may decide not to utilize a
Attachment 8
Page 513 of 550
reserve fund if the Finance Director, in consultation with the underwriter and municipal advisor, determines there
would be no adverse impact to the City’s credit rating or interest rates.
Per Internal Revenue Service rules, the size of the reserve fund on tax-exempt bond issuance is the lesser of
• 10% of the initial principal amount of the debt;
• 125% of average annual debt service; or
• 100% of maximum annual debt service.
In lieu of holding a cash funded reserve, the City may substitute a surety bond or other credit instrument in its
place. The decision to cash fund a reserve fund rather than to use a credit facility is dependent upon the cost of
the credit instrument, the investment opportunities and the IRS yield restrictions.
Call Options / Redemption Provisions – A call option or optional redemption provision gives the City the right to
prepay or retire debt prior to its stated maturity date. This option may permit the City to achieve interest savings
in the future through the refunding of the bonds. Often the City will pay a higher interest rate as compensation to
the buyer for the risk of having the bond called in the future. In addition, if a bond is called, the holder may be
entitled to a premium payment (call premium). Because the cost of call options can vary depending on market
conditions, an evaluation of factors will be conducted in connection with each issuance. The Finance Director shall
evaluate and recommend the use of a call option on a case by case basis.
Debt Limits – California Government Code Section 43605 states the City shall not incur bonded indebtedness
payable from the proceeds of property tax which exceeds 15 percent of the assessed value of all real and personal
property of the City.
Additionally, this policy establishes:
The cumulative annual debt service of all bond issues supported by the General Fund is restricted to no more than
15 percent of annual General Fund Revenue.
Bond issues supported by Enterprise Funds should maintain a minimum ratio of net operating income to annual
debt service (“coverage ratio”) that the Finance Director concludes is financially prudent to the City. Typically, a
higher coverage ratio produces a better credit rating and lower interest rates, yet if too high, potentially may
restrict efficient Enterprise operations or unduly induce unneeded user rate increases. Therefore, the City should
balance the benefits of higher ratings with the operational impact of high coverage ratios.
Section 7: Method of Issuance and Sale; Disclosure
Debt issues are sold to a single underwriter or to an underwriting syndicate, either through a competitive sale or a
negotiated sale. A negotiated sale may involve the sale of securities to investors through an underwriter or the
private placement of the securities with a financial institution or other sophisticated investor. The selected
method of sale will be that which is most beneficial to the City in terms of lowest net interest rate, most favorable
terms in financial structure, and market conditions. The Finance Director will review conditions in conjunction
with information and advice presented by the City’s Municipal Financial Advisor.
Competitive Sales of Bonds – In a competitive sale, the terms of the debt will be defined by the City and the City’s
finance team, and the price of the debt will be established through a bidding process amongst impartial
underwriters and/or underwriting syndicates. The issue is awarded to the underwriter judged to have submitted
Attachment 8
Page 514 of 550
the best bid that offers the lowest true interest cost taking into account underwriting spread, interest rates and
any discounts or premiums.
Negotiated Sale of Bonds – A method for sale for bonds, notes, or other financing vehicles in which the City selects
in advance, based upon proposals received or by other means, one or more underwriters to work with it in
structuring, marketing and finally offering an issue to investors. The negotiated sale method is often used when
the issue is: a first-time sale by an issuer (a new credit), a complex security structure, such as variable rate
transaction, an unusually large issue, or in a highly volatile or congested market where flexibility as to bond sale
timing is important.
Private Placement – A private placement is a variation of a negotiated sale in which the City, usually with the help
of a municipal financial advisor and placement agent will attempt to place the entire new issue directly with an
investor. The investor will negotiate the specific terms and conditions of the financing before agreeing to purchase
the issue. Private placements are generally undertaken because the transaction is complex or unique, requiring
direct negotiations with the investor, or because the issue is small or of a shorter duration and a direct offering
provides economies of scale, lower interest costs and reduced continuing disclosure.
Derivative products - Because of their complexity, unless otherwise amended, Derivative Products such as interest
rate swaps, interest floaters, and other hybrid securities are prohibited by this Debt Management Policy.
Initial Disclosure Requirements - The City acknowledges its disclosure responsibilities. Under the guidance of
Disclosure Counsel, the City will distribute or cause an underwriter to distribute its Preliminary Official Statement
and final Official Statement (neither is typically required in a private placement, although in some cases a “private
placement memorandum” may be required by the investor).
The Financing Team shall be responsible for soliciting “material” information (as defined in Securities and Exchange
Commission Rule 10b-5) from City departments and identifying contributors who may have information necessary
to prepare portions of the Official Statement or who should review portions of the Official Statement. In doing so,
the Financing Team shall confirm that the Official Statement accurately states all “material” information relating to
the decision to buy or sell the subject bonds and that all information in the Official Statement has been critically
reviewed by an appropriate person.
In connection with an initial offering of securities, the City and other members of the Financing Team will:
• Identify material information that should be disclosed in the Official Statement;
• Identify other persons that may have material information (contributors);
• Review and approve the Official Statement;
• Ensure the City’s compliance, and that of its related entities, with federal and state security laws,
including notification to the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (“CDIAC”) of the
proposed debt issue no later than 30 days prior to the sale of any debt issue, and submission of a final
report of the issuance to the CDIAC by any method approved by the CDIAC.
The Financing Team shall critically evaluate the Official Statement for accuracy and compliance with federal and
state securities laws. The approval of an Official Statement shall be placed on the City Council agenda, and shall
not be considered as a Consent Calendar item. The staff report will summarize the City Council’s responsibilities
with respect to the Official Statement and provide the City Council the opportunity to review a substantially final
Attachment 8
Page 515 of 550
Official Statement. The City Council shall undertake such review as deemed necessary by the City Council to fulfill
the City Council’s securities law responsibilities.1
For any privately placed debt with no Official Statement, the final staff report describing the issue and such other
documents will be provided to the City Council for approval.
Section 8: Creditworthiness Objectives
Ratings are a reflection of the general fiscal soundness of the City and the capabilities of its management.
Typically, the higher the credit ratings are, the lower the interest cost is on the City’s debt issues. To enhance
creditworthiness, the City is committed to prudent financial management, systematic capital planning, and long-
term financial planning, and to that end has an objective of maintaining a credit rating of at least AA- (Standard
and Poor’s); however, the City also recognizes that external economic, natural, or other events may, from time to
time, affect the creditworthiness of its debt.
The most familiar nationally recognized bond rating agencies are Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s Investors Service,
and Fitch Ratings. When issuing a credit rating, rating agencies consider various factors including but not limited
to:
• City’s fiscal status
• City’s general management capabilities;
• Economic conditions that may impact the stability and reliability of debt repayment sources;
• City’s general reserve levels;
• City’s debt history and current debt structure;
• Project being financed
• Covenants and conditions in the governing legal documents
Bond Ratings – The Financing Team will assess whether a credit rating should be obtained for an issuance. The
City typically seeks a rating from at least one nationally recognized rating agency on new and refunded issues being
sold in the public market. The Finance Director, working with the Financing Team, shall be responsible for
determining which of the major rating agencies the City shall request provide a rating. When applying for a rating
on an issue, the City and Financing Team shall prepare a presentation for the rating agency when the City
determines that a presentation is in the best interests of the City.
Rating Agency Communications – The Finance Director is responsible for maintaining relationships with the rating
agencies that assign ratings to the City’s various debt obligations. This effort shall include providing the rating
agencies with the City’s financial statements, if applicable, as well as any additional information requested.
1 The Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), the agency with regulatory authority over the City’s compliance with the
federal securities laws, has issued guidance as to the duties of the City Council with respect to its approval of the POS. In it’s
“Report of Investigation in the Matter of County of Orange, California as it Relates to the Conduct of the Members of the Board
of Supervisors” (Release No. 36761 / January 24, 1996) (the “Release”), the SEC stated that, if a member of the City Council has
knowledge of any facts or circumstances that an investor would want to know about prior to investing in the bonds, whether
relating to their repayment, tax-exempt status, undisclosed conflicts of interest with interested parties, or otherwise, he or she
should endeavor to discover whether such factor s are adequately disclosed in the Official Statement. In the Release, the SEC
stated that the steps that a member of the City Council would take include becoming familiar with the POS and questioning staff
and consultants about the disclosure of such facts.
Attachment 8
Page 516 of 550
Section 9: Post Issuance Administration
Notification to the CDIAC – The City shall work with its bond counsel to submit a report of final sale to the CDIAC
by any method approved by the CDIAC no later than 21 days after the sale of the debt. The report shall include the
information required by CDIAC.
Investment of Proceeds – The Finance Director shall invest bond proceeds and reserve funds in accordance with
each issue’s indenture or trust agreement, utilizing competitive bidding when possible. All investments will be
made in compliance with the City’s investment policy objectives of safety liquidity and then yield. The investment
of bond proceeds and reserve funds shall comply with federal tax law requirements specified in the indenture or
trust agreement and the tax certificate.
Unexpended bond proceeds shall be held by the bank trustee. The trustee will be responsible for recording all
investments and transactions relating to the proceeds and providing monthly statements regarding the
investments and transactions.
Use of Bond Proceeds – The Finance Director is responsible for ensuring debt proceeds are spent for the intended
purposes identified in the related legal documents and that the proceeds are spent in the time frames identified in
the tax certificate prepared by the City’s bond counsel. Whenever reasonably possible, proceeds of debt will be
held by a third-party trustee and the City will submit written requisitions for such proceeds. The City will submit a
requisition only after obtaining the signature of the Finance Director. In those cases where it is not reasonably
possible for the proceeds of debt to be held by a third-party trustee, the Finance Director shall retain records of all
expenditures of proceeds through the final payment date for the debt.
Continuing Disclosure – The Finance Director or designee will ensure the City’s annual financial statements and
associated reports are posted on the City’s web site. The City will also contract with consultant(s) to comply with
the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2 by filing its annual financial statements, other financial and
operating data and notices of enumerated events for the benefit of its bondholders on the Electronic Municipal
Market Access (EMMA) website of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB).
The City shall submit an annual report to the CDIAC for any issue of debt for which it has submitted a report of final
sale on or after January 21, 2017. The annual report shall comply with the requirements of Government Code
Section 8855 and related regulations.
Arbitrage Rebate Compliance and Reporting – The use and investment of bond proceeds must be monitored to
ensure compliance with Internal Revenue Service arbitrage restrictions. Existing regulations require that issuers
calculate rebate liabilities related to any bond issues, with rebates paid to the Federal Government every five years
and as otherwise required by applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and regulations. The Finance
Director shall contract with a specialist to ensure that proceeds and investments are tracked in a manner that
facilitates accurate complete calculations, and if necessary timely rebate payments.
Compliance with Other Bond Covenants – In addition to financial disclosure and arbitrage, the City is also
responsible for verifying compliance with all undertakings, covenants, and agreements of each bond issuance on
an ongoing basis. The Finance Director in responsible for ensuring the City remains in compliance with bond
covenants or making the appropriate disclosures if the city is not in compliance. Other bond covenants typically
include:
• Annual appropriation of revenues to meet debt service payments;
• Taxes/fees are levied and collected where applicable;
Attachment 8
Page 517 of 550
• Timely transfer of debt service payments to the trustee
• Compliance with insurance requirements
• Compliance with rate covenants
• Post-issuance procedures established in the tax certificate for any tax-exempt debt
• Timely posting of financial information on the EMMA system.
Retention – A copy of all relevant documents and records will be maintained by the Finance Department for the
term of the bonds (including refunding bonds, if any) in accordance with the city’s retention policy and per
California Code. Relevant documents and records will include sufficient documentation to support the
requirements relating to the tax-exempt status.
Investor Relations – While the City shall post its annual financial report as well as other financial reports on the
City’s website, this information is intended for the citizens of the City. Information that the City intends to reach
the investing public, including bondholders, rating analysts, investment advisors, or any other members of the
investment community shall be filed on the EMMA system.
Additional requirements for financial statements – It is the City’s policy to hire an auditing firm that has the
technical skills and resources to properly perform an annual audit of the City’s financial statements. More
specifically, the firm shall be a recognized expert in the accounting rules applicable to the City and shall have the
resources necessary to review the City’s financial statements on a timely basis.
Section 10: Training
The Finance Director shall ensure that the members of the City staff involved in the initial or continuing disclosure
process and the City Council are properly trained to understand and perform their responsibilities.
The Finance Director shall arrange for disclosure training sessions conducted by the City’s disclosure counsel. Such
training sessions shall include education on the Initial Disclosure and Continuing Disclosure sections of this Debt
Management Policy, the City’s disclosure obligations under applicable federal and state securities laws and the
disclosure responsibilities and potential liabilities of members of the City’s staff and members of the City Council.
Such training sessions may be conducted using a recorded presentation.
Attachment 8
Page 518 of 550
Section 11: Glossary
Ad Valorem Tax: A tax calculated “according to the value” of property. Such a tax is based on the assessed
valuation of real property and a valuation of tangible personal property.
Amortization: The gradual reduction in principal of an outstanding debt based upon a specific repayment
schedule, which details specific dates and repayment amounts on those dates.
Arbitrage: The gain that may be obtained by borrowing funds at a lower (often tax-exempt) rate and investing the
proceeds at higher (often taxable) rates. The ability to earn arbitrage by issuing tax-exempt securities has been
severely curtailed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
Assessed Valuation: The appraised worth of property as set by a taxing authority through assessments for
purposes of ad valorem taxation
Bond: A security that represents an obligation to pay a specified amount of money on a specific date in the future,
typically with periodic interest payments.
Bond Anticipation Notes: Short-term notes issued usually for capital projects and paid from the proceeds of the
issuance of long-term bonds. Provide interim financing in anticipation of bond issuance.
Bond Counsel: A specialized, qualified attorney retained by the issuer to give a legal opinion concerning the
validity of securities. The bond counsel’s opinion usually addresses the subject of tax exemption. Bond counsel
may prepare or review and advise the issuer regarding authorizing resolutions, trust indentures and litigation.
Bond Insurance: A type of credit enhancement whereby an insurance company indemnifies an investor against
default by the issuer. In the event of failure by the issuer to pay principal and interest in full and on time, investors
may call upon the insurance company to do so. Once issued, the municipal bond insurance policy is generally
irrevocable. The insurance company receives its premium when the policy is issued and this premium is typically
paid out of the bond issue.
Call Option: The right to redeem a bond prior to its stated maturity, either on a given date or continuously. The
call option is also referred to as the optional redemption provision. Often a call premium is added to the call
option as compensation to the holders of the earliest bonds called.
Capital Appreciation Bond: A municipal security on which the investment return on an initial principal amount is
reinvested at a stated compounded rate until maturity, at which time the investor receives a single payment
representing both the initial principal amount and the total investment return.
CDIAC: California Debt and Advisory Commission (“CDIAC”)
Certificates of Participation: A financial instrument representing a proportionate interest in payments such as
lease payments by one party (such as a city acting as a lessee) to another party (often a trustee).
Competitive Sale: A sale of bonds in which an underwriter or syndicate of underwriters submit sealed bids to
purchase the bonds. Bids are awarded on a true interest cost basis (TIC), providing that other bidding
requirements are satisfied. Competitive sales are recommended for simple financings with a strong underlying
credit rating. This type of sale is in contrast to a Negotiated Sale
Attachment 8
Page 519 of 550
Continuing Disclosure: The requirement by the Securities and Exchange Commission for most issuers of municipal
debt to post current financial information and notices of enumerated events on the MSRB’s EMMA website for
access by the general marketplace.
Credit Rating Agency: A company that rates the relative credit quality of a bond issue and assigns a letter rating.
These rating agencies include Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s, and Fitch Ratings.
Debt Limit: The maximum amount of debt that is legally permitted by applicable charter, constitution, or statutes.
Debt Service: The amount necessary to pay principal and interest requirements on outstanding bonds for a given
year or series of years.
Default: The failure to pay principal or interest in full or on time and, in some cases, the failure to comply with
non-payment obligations after notice and the opportunity to cure.
Derivative: A financial instrument which derives its own value from the value of another instrument, usually an
underlying asset such as a stock, bond, or an underlying reference such as an interest rate index.
Disclosure Counsel: A specialized, qualified attorney retained to provide advice on issuer disclosure obligations, to
prepare the official statement and to prepare the continuing disclosure undertaking.
Discount: The difference between a bond’s par value and the price for which it is sold when the latter is less than
par. Also known as “underwriter discount,” this is the fee paid to the underwriter its banking and bond marketing
services.
EMMA System: Electronic Municipal Markey Access: Website created to provide information about municipal
bonds, bond prices and market trends to the public. Bond covenants typically require the city’s financial
information be timely submitted to EMMA.
Enterprise Activity: revenue generating project or business. The project often provides funds necessary to pay
debt service on securities issued to finance the facility. Common examples include water and solid waste
enterprises
Financing Team: The working group of City staff and outside consultants necessary to complete a debt issuance.
General Obligation (GO) Bond: A bond secured by an unlimited property tax pledge. Requires a two-thirds vote
by the electorate. GO bonds usually achieve lower rates of interest than other financing instruments since they
are considered to be a lower risk.
Indenture: A contract between the issuer and the trustee stipulating the characteristics of the financial
instrument, the issuer’s obligation to pay debt service, and the remedies available to the trustee in the event of
default.
Issuance Costs: The costs incurred by the bond issuer during the planning and sale of securities. These costs
include by are not limited to municipal financial advisory, bond counsel, disclosure counsel, printing, advertising
costs, credit enhancement, rating agencies fees, and other expenses incurred in the marketing of an issue.
Lease: An obligation wherein a lessee agrees to make payments to a lessor in exchange for the use of certain
property. The term may refer to a capital lease or to an operating lease.
Attachment 8
Page 520 of 550
Lease Revenue Bonds: Bonds that are secured by an obligation of one party to make annual lease payments to
another.
Maturity Date: The date upon which a specified amount of debt principal or bonds matures, or becomes due and
payable by the issuer of the debt.
Municipal Financial Advisor: A consultant who provides the issuer with advice on the structure of the bond issue,
timing, terms and related matters for a new bond issue.
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB): A self-regulating organization established on September 5, 1975
upon the appointment of a 15-member board by the Securities and Exchange Agreement. The MSRB, comprised
of representatives from investment banking firms, dealer bank representatives, and public representatives, is
entrusted with the responsibility of writing rules of conduct for the municipal securities market. The MSRB hosts
the EMMA website, which hosts information posted by issuers under their continuing disclosure undertakings.
Negotiated Sale: A sale of securities in which the terms of the sale are determined through negotiation between
the issuer and the purchaser, typically an underwriter, without competitive bidding. The negotiated sales process
provides control over the financing structure and issuance timing. Negotiated sales are recommended for unusual
financing terms, period of market volatility and weaker credit quality. A thorough evaluation, usually with the
assistance of the City’s Municipal Financial Advisor, of the proposed bond’s credit characteristics in conjunction
with market conditions will be performed to ensure reasonable final pricing and underwriting spread.
Official Statement (Prospectus): A document published by the issuer in connection with a primary offering of
securities that discloses material information on a new security issue including the purposes of the issue, how the
securities will be repaid, and the financial, economic and social characteristics of the security for the bonds.
Investors may use this information to evaluate the credit quality of the securities.
Par Value: The face value or principal amount of a security.
Pension Obligation Bonds: Financing instruments used to pay some or all of the unfunded pension liability of a
pension plan. POBs are issued as taxable instruments over a 10-40 year term or by matching the term with the
amortization period of the outstanding unfunded actuarial accrued liability.
Premium: The excess of the price at which a bond is sold over its face value.
Present Value: The value of a future amount or stream of revenues or expenditures.
Pricing Consultant: The Pricing Consultant provides a fairness letter to the City or its agent regarding the pricing of
a new issue of municipal securities.
Private Placement: A bond issue that is structured specifically for one purchaser. Private placements are typically
carried out when extraneous circumstances preclude public offerings. A private placement is considered to be a
negotiated sale.
Redemption: Depending on an issue’s call provisions, an issuer may on certain dates and at certain premiums,
redeem or call specific outstanding maturities. When a bond or certificate is redeemed, the issuer is required to
pay the maturities’ par value, the accrued interest to the call date, plus any premium required by the issue’s call
provisions.
Refunding: A procedure whereby an issuer refinances an outstanding debt issue by issuing a new debt issue.
Attachment 8
Page 521 of 550
Rule 15c2-12: Rule adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission setting forth certain obligations of (i)
underwriters to receive, review and disseminate official statements prepared by issuers of most primary offering
of municipal securities, (ii) underwriters to obtain continuing disclosure agreements from issuers and other
obligated persons to provide ongoing annual financial information on a continuing basis, and (iii) broker-dealers to
have access to such continuing disclosure in order to make recommendations of municipal securities in the
secondary market.
Reserve Fund: A fund established by the indenture of a bond issue into which money is deposited for payment of
debt service in case of a shortfall in current revenues.
Revenue Bond: A bond which is payable from a specific source of revenue and to which the full faith and credit of
an issuer is not pledged. Revenue bonds are payable from identified sources of revenue, and do not permit the
bondholders to compel a jurisdiction to pay debt service from any other source. Pledged revenues often are
derived from the operation of an enterprise.
Secondary Market: The market in which bonds are sold after their initial sale in the new issue market.
Serial Bonds: Bonds of an issue that mature in consecutive years or other intervals and are not subject to
mandatory sinking fund provisions.
Special Tax Bonds: Bonds issued to fund eligible improvements and paid with special taxes levied in a community
facilities district formed under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, or other applicable
law.
State Revolving Funds: The State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan is a low interest loan program for the construction of
water infrastructure projects.
Tax Allocation Bonds: Historically, tax allocation bonds referred to bonds issued under the Community
Redevelopment Law to fund eligible capital facilities located within a redevelopment project area. However, as a
result of the passage of AB X1 26, the [CITY] Redevelopment Agency has been dissolved and the successor agency’s
obligations are limited to performing certain enforceable obligations. The California Legislature has enacted a
number of laws that establish alternative tax increment financing mechanisms, and tax allocation bonds may be
issued under these laws in the future.
Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANS): Short term notes issued in anticipation of receiving tax receipts and
revenues within a fiscal year. TRANs allow the municipality to manage the period of cash shortfalls resulting from
a mismatch between timing of revenues and timing of expenditures.
Term Bonds: Bonds that come due in a single maturity but where the issuer may agree to make periodic payments
into a sinking fund for mandatory redemption of term bonds before maturity and for payment at maturity.
True Interest Cost (TIC): Under this method of computing the interest expense to the issuer of bonds, true interest
cost is defined as the rate necessary to discount the amounts payable on the respective principal and interest
payment dates to the purchase price received for the new issue of bonds. Interest is assumed to be compounded
semi-annually. TIC computations produce a figure slightly different from the net interest cost (NIC) method
because TIC considers the time value of money while NIC does not.
Attachment 8
Page 522 of 550
Trustee: A bank retained by the issuer as custodian of bond proceeds and official representative of bondholders.
The trustee ensures compliance with the indenture. In many cases, the trustee also acts as paying agent and is
responsible for transmitting payments of interest and principal to the bondholders.
Underwriter: A broker-dealer that purchases a new issue of municipal securities from the issuer for resale in a
primary offering. The bonds may be purchased either through a negotiated sale with the issuer or through a
competitive sale.
Yield: The net rate of return, as a percentage, received by an investor on an investment. Yield calculations on a
fixed income investment, such as a bond issue, take purchase price and coupon into account when calculating yield
to maturity.
Revision Tracking:
Implemented: February 15, 2017
Revised: June 16, 2021
Attachment 8
Page 523 of 550
Attachment 9
CITY OF UKIAH
Debt Management Policy
FEBRUARY 15, 2017JUNE 16, 2021
CITY OF UKIAH, CA
Page 524 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 1
Finance and IT Department
TITLE:
DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
CATEGORY: ACCOUNTING AND
REPORTING
ADOPTION LEVEL:
CITY COUNCIL DATE:
POLICY NO.: AR-002 ENABLING
RESOLUTION
(resolution no)
N/A
Authorizing
Signature ORIGINALLY
ADOPTED
(adoption
date)2/15/2017
REVISED 6/16/2021
POLICY COMMITTEE 6/9/2021
DEPARTMENT HEAD (signature date)
Table of Contents
Section 1: Policy ............................................................................................................................................ 23
Section 2: Scope ........................................................................................................................................... 23
Section 3: Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 23
Section 4: Delegation Authority...................................................................................................................... 34
Section 5: Methods of Financing .................................................................................................................... 34
Section 6: Structure and Term ........................................................................................................................ 56
Section 7: Method of Issuance and Sale; Disclosure ......................................................................................... 67
Section 8: Creditworthiness Objectives ........................................................................................................... 89
Section 9: Post Issuance Administration ........................................................................................................ 910
Section 10: Training................................................................................................................................... 1011
Section 11: Glossary .................................................................................................................................. 1112
Page 525 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 2
Section 1: Policy
This Debt Management Policy sets forth debt management objectives for the City of Ukiah and its component units
for which the City Council acts as legislative body, and the term “City” shall refer to each of such entities.
This Debt Management Policy establishes general parameters for issuing and administering debt. Recognizing that
cost-effective access to the capital markets depends on prudent management of the Debt Program, the City
Council has adopted this Debt Management Policy by resolution.
This Debt Management Policy is intended to comply with California Government Code Section 8855(i) and SB 1029
(2016).
Section 2: Scope
The guidelines established by this policy will govern the issuance and management of all debt funded for long term
capital financing needs and not for general operating functions. When used in this policy, “debt” refers to all forms
of indebtedness and financing lease obligations. The Finance Department recognizes that changes in the capital
markets and other unforeseen circumstances may require action that deviates from this Debt Management Policy.
In cases that require exceptions to this Debt Management Policy, approval from the City Council will be necessary
for implementation.
Section 3: Objectives
The purpose of this Debt Management Policy is to assist the City in pursuit of the following equally important
objectives, while providing full and complete financial disclosure and ensuring compliance with applicable state
and federal laws:
Minimize debt service and issuance costs;
Maintain access to cost effective borrowing
Achieve the highest practical credit rating
Ensure full and timely repayment of debt
Maintain full and complete financial disclosure and reporting
Ensure compliance with applicable state and federal laws
Budget Integration – The decision to incur new indebtedness should be integrated with the policy decisions
embedded in the City Council-adopted annual Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Program Budget. The
annual debt service payments shall be included in the Operating Budget.
The City will integrate its debt issuances with the goals of its Capital Improvement Program by timing the issuance
of debt to ensure that projects and related funding are available when needed in furtherance of the City’s public
purposes. The City will seek to issue debt in a timely manner to avoid having to make unplanned expenditures for
capital improvements or equipment from its general fund.
Review – Recognizing that cost-effective access to the capital market depends on prudent management of the
City’s debt program, a regular review of the debt policy should be performed. The debt policy will be included as
an Appendix in the annual Budget adopted by City Council. Any substantive changes to the policy shall be brought
to the City Council for consideration and approval as part of the annual budget process.
Page 526 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 3
Section 4: Delegation Authority
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 37209 and 40805.5 of the Government Code of the State of California, the
Finance Director shall be responsible for all of the financial affairs of the City. This Debt Management Policy grants
the Finance Director the authority , subject to the budget integration as discussed above, to select the financing
team, coordinate the administration and issuance of debt, communicate with the rating agencies, fulfilland fulfill
all of the pre-issuance and post-issuance requirements imposed by or related to state law, federal tax law and
federal securities law.
Financing Team Definitions and Roles – The financing team is the working group of City staff and outside
consultants necessary to complete a debt issuance including but not limited to bond counsel, disclosure counsel,
underwriter, municipal financial advisor, trustee, pricing consultant and/or arbitrage analyst.
Typically, the Finance Director, the City Attorney, the City Manager, and appropriate Department Head(s) form the
City staff portion of the Financing Team. Other staff members or designees may be appointed to the Financing
Team.
Consultant Selection – The City will consider the professional qualifications and experience of consultants as it
relates to the specific bond issue or other financing under consideration in accordance and pursuant to the City’s
Municipal Code and purchasing policies.
Section 5: Methods of Financing
The Finance Director will investigate all possible financing alternatives including, but not limited to bonds, loans,
state bond pools, and grants. The City also has an impact fee program whereby new development pays its fair
share for the increased capital and operating costs that result from new construction. Although impact fee
payments are restricted to specific projects or types of projects, the use of these payments can be an important
source of financing for certain capital projects.
Cash Funding – The City funds a significant portion of capital improvements from reserves accumulated from one-
time revenues, which have been set aside for investment in the City’s infrastructure.
Inter-fund Borrowing – The City may borrow internally from other funds with surplus cash in lieu of issuing bonded
debt. Purposes warranting the use of this type of borrowing could include short term cash flow imbalances,
interim financing pending the issuance of bonds, or long term financing in lieu of bonds for principal amounts of
under $10 million. The City funds from which the money is borrowed may be repaid with interest based upon the
earning rate of the City’s investment portfolio. The Finance Director shall also exercise due diligence to ensure
that it is financially prudent for the fFund making the loan.
Inter-fund loans will be evaluated on a case by case basis by the Finance Department. Short-term borrowing for
cash flow purposes, expected to be repaid within the next operating (budget) cycle, shall be authorized and
executed by the Finance Director.
Any long-term borrowing (advances) between two City funds, with full maturity not expected until beyond the
next operating cyclewithin the succeeding fiscal year and where interest is charged by one fund and incurred by
the other, will may require approval by City Council by resolution. The Finance Director is authorized to execute
advances between funds when and where appropriate and necessary for cash flow or intermediate financial
planning purposes. The purpose of inter-fund borrowing is includesto financinge high priority needs and to reduce
Page 527 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 4
costs of interest, debt issuance and/or administration. unlessUnless otherwise stated below, the Finance Director
is authorized to execute loans documents required to finalize borrowings.
Bank Loans / Lines of Credit – Although the City does not typically utilize lines of credit for the financing of capital
projects, financial institution credit is an option for municipal issuers and may be evaluated as a financing option.
Other Loans – The City will evaluate other loan programs, including but not limited to State loans such as the
Water Resources Control Board’s revolving fund loans for the construction of water infrastructure projects.
Bond Financing – The City may issue any bonds which are allowed under federal and state law including but not
limited to general obligation bonds, certificates of participation, revenue bonds, land-secured (assessment and
special tax) bonds, refunding bonds and special tax bonds (see below for detail).
General Obligation Bonds – General Obligation Bonds (GO Bonds) may only be issued with two-thirds approval of
the City’s registered voters. The California State Constitution (Article XVI, Section 18) limits the use of the
proceeds from GO Bonds to “the acquisition or improvement of real property”. Parks and Public Safety facilities
are examples of the type of facilities that could be financed with GO Bonds. City Council must approve placement
of such GO Bonds on the ballot.
Lease Financings – Lease financings may take a variety of forms, including certificates of participation, lease
revenue bonds and direct leases (typically for equipment). When the City finances acquisition or construction of
capital improvements or equipment with a lease financing, the City agrees to lease either the financed asset or a
different asset and, most commonly, the City’s lease payments are securitized in the form of certificates of
participation or lease revenue bonds. This type of financing requires approval of City Council.
Revenue Bonds – Revenue Bonds are generally issued by the City for enterprise funds that are financially self-
sustaining without the use of taxes and therefore rely on the revenues collected by the enterprise fund to repay
the debt. This type of financing requires approval of City Council.
Assessment Bonds – The Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Streets and Highways Code Section 8500 et seq.) and
other state laws, subject to Article XIIID of the California Constitution, allow the City to issue bonds to finance
improvements that provide “specific benefit” to the assessed real property. Installments are collected on the
secured property tax roll of the County. The City, may also adopt assessment laws that are applicable within its
boundaries. This type of financing is secured by the lien upon and assessments paid by the real property owners
and does not obligate the City’s general fund or other funds. This type of financing requires approval of City
Council.
Special Tax Bonds – Under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, the City may issue bonds on behalf of
a Community Facilities District (CFD) to finance capital facilities, most commonly in connection with new
development. These bonds must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the qualified electors in the CFD, which the
Mello-Roos Act defines to mean registered voters if there are 12 or more registered voters in the CFD and, if there
are fewer than 12 registered voters, the landowners in the CFD. Bonds issued by the City under the Mello-Roos Act
are secured by a special tax on the real property within the CFD. The financed facilities do not need to be
physically located within the CFD. The City may also adopt special tax financing laws that are applicable within its
boundaries. As this type of financing is secured by the special tax lien upon the real property it does not obligate
the City’s general fund or other funds. City Council must approve placement of such Special Tax Bonds on the
ballot.
Page 528 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 5
Refunding Obligations – Pursuant to the Government Code and various other financing statues applicable in
specific situations, the City Council is authorized to provide for the issuance of bonds for the purpose of refunding
any long-term obligation of the City. Absent any significant non-economic factors, a refunding should produce
minimum net debt service savings (net of reserve fund earnings and other offsets, and taking transaction costs into
account) of at least 3% of the par value of the refunded bonds on a net present value basis, using the refunding
issue’s True Interest Cost (TIC) as the discount rate, unless the Finance Director determines that a lower savings
percentage is acceptable for issues or maturities with short maturity dates. [Additionally, the Finance Director may
determine that there are other, compelling “non-economic” reasons (i.e. removal of onerous covenants, terms or
conditions)]. This type of financing requires approval of the City Council.
Other Obligations – There may be special circumstances when other forms of debt are appropriate and may be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Such other forms include, but are not limited to: bond anticipation notes, grant
anticipation notes, tax allocation bonds, lease revenue bonds, pension obligation bonds, etc. This type of financing
requires approval of the City Council.
Section 6: Structure and Term
Term of Debt – Debt will be structured for the shortest period possible, consistent with a fair allocation of costs to
current and future users. The standard term of long-term debt borrowing is typically 15-30 years.
Consistent with its philosophy of keeping its capital facilities and infrastructure systems in good condition and
maximizing a capital asset’s useful life, the City will make every effort to set aside sufficient current revenues to
finance ongoing maintenance needs and to provide reserves for periodic replacement and renewal. Generally, no
debt will be issued for a period exceeding the useful life or average useful lives of projects to be financed.
Debt Repayment Structure – In structuring a bond issue, the City will manage the amortization of the debt and, to
the extent possible, match its cash flow to the anticipated debt service payments. In addition, the City will seek to
structure debt with aggregate level debt service payments over the life of the debt. Structures with
unlevelunleveled debt service will be considered when one or more of the following exist:
Natural disasters or extraordinary unanticipated external factors make payments on the debt in the early
years prohibitive;
Such structuring is beneficial to the City’s aggregate overall debt payment schedule;
Such structuring will allow debt service to more closely match project revenues during the early years of
the project’s operation.
Bond Maturity Options – For each issuance, the City will select serial bonds or term bonds, or both. On the
occasions where circumstances warrant, capital appreciation bonds (CABs) may be used. The decision to use term,
serial or CABs is typically driven by market conditions.
Interest Rate Structure – The City will issue securities on fixed or variable interest rates, which ever will be most
beneficial to the City.
Credit Enhancement – Credit enhancement may be used to improve or establish a credit rating on a City debt
obligation. Types of credit enhancement include letters of credit, bond insurance and surety policies. The Finance
Director will recommend the use of a credit enhancement if it reduces the overall cost of the proposed financing or
if the use of such credit enhancement furthers the City’s overall financial objectives.
Page 529 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 6
Debt Service Reserve Fund – Debt service reserve funds are held by the Trustee to make principal and interest
payments to bondholders in the event the pledged revenues are insufficient to do so. The City will fund debt
service reserve funds when it is in the city’s overall best financial interest. The City may decide not to utilize a
reserve fund if the Finance Director, in consultation with the underwriter and municipal advisor, determines there
would be no adverse impact to the City’s credit rating or interest rates.
Per Internal Revenue Service rules, the size of the reserve fund on tax-exempt bond issuance is the lesser of
10% of the initial principal amount of the debt;
125% of average annual debt service; or
100% of maximum annual debt service.
In lieu of holding a cash funded reserve, the City may substitute a surety bond or other credit instrument in its
place. The decision to cash fund a reserve fund rather than to use a credit facility is dependent upon the cost of
the credit instrument, and the investment opportunities and the IRS yield restrictions. .
Call Options / Redemption Provisions – A call option or optional redemption provision gives the City the right to
prepay or retire debt prior to its stated maturity date. This option may permit the City to achieve interest savings
in the future through the refunding of the bonds. Often the City will pay a higher interest rate as compensation to
the buyer for the risk of having the bond called in the future. In addition, if a bond is called, the holder may be
entitled to a premium payment (call premium). Because the cost of call options can vary depending on market
conditions, an evaluation of factors will be conducted in connection with each issuance. The Finance Director shall
evaluate and recommend the use of a call option on a case by case basis.
Debt Limits – California Government Code Section 43605 states the City shall not incur bonded indebtedness
payable from the proceeds of property tax which exceeds 15 percent of the assessed value of all real and personal
property of the City.
Additionally, this policy establishes:
The cumulative annual debt service of all bond issues supported by the General Fund is restricted to no more than
15 percent of annual General Fund Revenue.
Bond issues supported by Enterprise Funds should maintain a minimum ratio of net operating income to annual
debt service (“coverage ratio”) that the Finance Director concludes is financially prudent to the City. Typically, a
higher coverage ratio produces a better credit rating and lower interest rates, yet if too high, potentially may
restrict efficient Enterprise operations or unduly induce unneeded user rate increases. Therefore, the City should
balance the benefits of higher ratings with the operational impact of high coverage ratios.
Section 7: Method of Issuance and Sale; Disclosure
Debt issues are sold to a single underwriter or to an underwriting syndicate, either through a competitive sale or a
negotiated sale. A negotiated sale may involve the sale of securities to investors through an underwriter or the
private placement of the securities with a financial institution or other sophisticated investor. The selected
method of sale will be that which is most beneficial to the City in terms of lowest net interest rate, most favorable
terms in financial structure, and market conditions. The Finance Director will review conditions in conjunction
with information and advice presented by the City’s Municipal Financial Advisor.
Page 530 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 7
Competitive Sales of Bonds – In a competitive sale, the terms of the debt will be defined by the City and the City’s
finance team, and the price of the debt will be established through a bidding process amongst impartial
underwriters and/or underwriting syndicates. The issue is awarded to the underwriter judged to have submitted
the best bid that offers the lowest true interest cost taking into account underwriting spread, interest rates and
any discounts or premiums.
Negotiated Sale of Bonds – A method for sale for bonds, notes, or other financing vehicles in which the City selects
in advance, based upon proposals received or by other means, one or more underwriters to work with it in
structuring, marketing and finally offering an issue to investors. The negotiated sale method is often used when
the issue is: a first-time sale by an issuer (a new credit), a complex security structure, such as variable rate
transaction, an unusually large issue, or in a highly volatile or congested market where flexibility as to bond sale
timing is important.
Private Placement – A private placement is a variation of a negotiated sale in which the City, usually with the help
of a municipal financial advisor and placement agent will attempt to place the entire new issue directly with an
investor. The investor will negotiate the specific terms and conditions of the financing before agreeing to purchase
the issue. Private placements are generally undertaken because the transaction is complex or unique, requiring
direct negotiations with the investor, or because the issue is small or of a shorter duration and a direct offering
provides economies of scale, lower interest costs and reduced continuing disclosure.
Derivative products - Because of their complexity, unless otherwise amended, Derivative Products such as interest
rate swaps, interest floaters, and other hybrid securities are prohibited by this Debt Management Policy.
Initial Disclosure Requirements - The City acknowledges its disclosure responsibilities. Under the guidance of
Disclosure Counsel, the City will distribute or cause an underwriter to distribute its Preliminary Official Statement
and final Official Statement (neither is typically required in a private placement, although in some cases a “private
placement memorandum” may be required by the investor).
The Financing Team shall be responsible for soliciting “material” information (as defined in Securities and Exchange
Commission Rule 10b-5) from City departments and identifying contributors who may have information necessary
to prepare portions of the Official Statement or who should review portions of the Official Statement. In doing so,
the Financing Team shall confirm that the Official Statement accurately states all “material” information relating to
the decision to buy or sell the subject bonds and that all information in the Official Statement has been critically
reviewed by an appropriate person.
In connection with an initial offering of securities, the City and other members of the Financing Team will:
Identify material information that should be disclosed in the Official Statement;
Identify other persons that may have material information (contributors);
Review and approve the Official Statement;
Ensure the City’s compliance, and that of its related entities, with federal and state security laws,
including notification to the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission (“CDIAC”) of the
proposed debt issue no later than 30 days prior to the sale of any debt issue, and submission of a final
report of the issuance to the CDIAC by any method approved by the CDIAC.
The Financing Team shall critically evaluate the Official Statement for accuracy and compliance with federal and
state securities laws. The approval of an Official Statement shall be placed on the City Council agenda, and shall
not be considered as a Consent Calendar item. The staff report will summarize the City Council’s responsibilities
Page 531 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 8
with respect to the Official Statement and provide the City Council the opportunity to review a substantially final
Official Statement. The City Council shall undertake such review as deemed necessary by the City Council to fulfill
the City Council’s securities law responsibilities.1
For any privately placed debt with no Official Statement, the final staff report describing the issue and such other
documents will be provided to the City Council for approval.
Section 8: Creditworthiness Objectives
Ratings are a reflection of the general fiscal soundness of the City and the capabilities of its management.
Typically, the higher the credit ratings are, the lower the interest cost is on the City’s debt issues. To enhance
creditworthiness, the City is committed to prudent financial management, systematic capital planning, and long-
term financial planning, and to that end has an objective of maintaining a credit rating of at least AA- (Standard
and Poor’s); however, the City also recognizes that external economic, natural, or other events may, from time to
time, affect the creditworthiness of its debt.
The most familiar nationally recognized bond rating agencies are Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s Investors Service,
and Fitch Ratings. When issuing a credit rating, rating agencies consider various factors including but not limited
to:
City’s fiscal status
City’s general management capabilities;
Economic conditions that may impact the stability and reliability of debt repayment sources;
City’s general reserve levels;
City’s debt history and current debt structure;
Project being financed
Covenants and conditions in the governing legal documents
Bond Ratings – The Financing Team will assess whether a credit rating should be obtained for an issuance. The
City typically seeks a rating from at least one nationally recognized rating agency on new and refunded issues being
sold in the public market. The Finance Director, working with the Financing Team, shall be responsible for
determining which of the major rating agencies the City shall request provide a rating. When applying for a rating
on an issue, the City and Financing Team shall prepare a presentation for the rating agency when the City
determines that a presentation is in the best interests of the City.
Rating Agency Communications – The Finance Director is responsible for maintaining relationships with the rating
agencies that assign ratings to the City’s various debt obligations. This effort shall include providing the rating
agencies with the City’s financial statements, if applicable, as well as any additional information requested.
1 The Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), the agency with regulatory authority over the City’s compliance with the
federal securities laws, has issued guidance as to the duties of the City Council with respect to its approval of the POS. In it’s
“Report of Investigation in the Matter of County of Orange, California as it Relates to the Conduct of the Members of the Board
of Supervisors” (Release No. 36761 / January 24, 1996) (the “Release”), the SEC stated that, if a member of the City Council has
knowledge of any facts or circumstances that an investor would want to know about prior to investing in the bonds, whether
relating to their repayment, tax-exempt status, undisclosed conflicts of interest with interested parties, or otherwise, he or she
should endeavor to discover whether such factor s are adequately disclosed in the Official Statement. In the Release, the SEC
stated that the steps that a member of the City Council would take include becoming familiar with the POS and questioning staff
and consultants about the disclosure of such facts.
Page 532 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 9
Section 9: Post Issuance Administration
Notification to the CDIAC – The City shall work with its bond counsel to submit a report of final sale to the CDIAC
by any method approved by the CDIAC no later than 21 days after the sale of the debt. The report shall include the
information required by CDIAC.
Investment of Proceeds – The Finance Director shall invest bond proceeds and reserve funds in accordance with
each issue’s indenture or trust agreement, utilizing competitive bidding when possible. All investments will be
made in compliance with the City’s investment policy objectives of safety liquidity and then yield. The investment
of bond proceeds and reserve funds shall comply with federal tax law requirements specified in the indenture or
trust agreement and the tax certificate.
Unexpended bond proceeds shall be held by the bank trustee. The trustee will be responsible for recording all
investments and transactions relating to the proceeds and providing monthly statements regarding the
investments and transactions.
Use of Bond Proceeds – The Finance Director is responsible for ensuring debt proceeds are spent for the intended
purposes identified in the related legal documents and that the proceeds are spent in the time frames identified in
the tax certificate prepared by the City’s bond counsel. Whenever reasonably possible, proceeds of debt will be
held by a third-party trustee and the City will submit written requisitions for such proceeds. The City will submit a
requisition only after obtaining the signature of the Finance Director. In those cases where it is not reasonably
possible for the proceeds of debt to be held by a third-party trustee, the Finance Director shall retain records of all
expenditures of proceeds through the final payment date for the debt.
Continuing Disclosure – The Finance Director or designee will ensure the City’s annual financial statements and
associated reports are posted on the City’s web site. The City will also contract with consultant(s) to comply with
the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2 by filing its annual financial statements, other financial and
operating data and notices of enumerated events for the benefit of its bondholders on the Electronic Municipal
Market Access (EMMA) website of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB).
The City shall submit an annual report to the CDIAC for any issue of debt for which it has submitted a report of final
sale on or after January 21, 2017. The annual report shall comply with the requirements of Government Code
Section 8855 and related regulations.
Arbitrage Rebate Compliance and Reporting – The use and investment of bond proceeds must be monitored to
ensure compliance with Internal Revenue Service arbitrage restrictions. Existing regulations require that issuers
calculate rebate liabilities related to any bond issues, with rebates paid to the Federal Government every five years
and as otherwise required by applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and regulations. The Finance
Director shall contract with a specialist to ensure that proceeds and investments are tracked in a manner that
facilitates accurate complete calculations, and if necessary timely rebate payments.
Compliance with Other Bond Covenants – In addition to financial disclosure and arbitrage, the City is also
responsible for verifying compliance with all undertakings, covenants, and agreements of each bond issuance on
an ongoing basis. The Finance Director in responsible for ensuring the City remains in compliance with bond
covenants or making the appropriate disclosures if the city is not in compliance. Other bond covenants This
typically includes ensuring:
Annual appropriation of revenues to meet debt service payments;
Taxes/fees are levied and collected where applicable;
Page 533 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 10
Timely transfer of debt service payments to the trustee
Compliance with insurance requirements
Compliance with rate covenants
Post-issuance procedures established in the tax certificate for any tax-exempt debt
Timely posting of financial information on the EMMA system.
Retention – A copy of all relevant documents and records will be maintained by the Finance Department for the
term of the bonds (including refunding bonds, if any) in accordance with the city’s retention policy and per
California Code. Relevant documents and records will include sufficient documentation to support the
requirements relating to the tax-exempt status.
Investor Relations – While the City shall post its annual financial report as well as other financial reports on the
City’s website, this information is intended for the citizens of the City. Information that the City intends to reach
the investing public, including bondholders, rating analysts, investment advisors, or any other members of the
investment community shall be filed on the EMMA system.
Additional requirements for financial statements – It is the City’s policy to hire an auditing firm that has the
technical skills and resources to properly perform an annual audit of the City’s financial statements. More
specifically, the firm shall be a recognized expert in the accounting rules applicable to the City and shall have the
resources necessary to review the City’s financial statements on a timely basis.
Section 10: Training
The Finance Director shall ensure that the members of the City staff involved in the initial or continuing disclosure
process and the City Council are properly trained to understand and perform their responsibilities.
The Finance Director shall arrange for disclosure training sessions conducted by the City’s disclosure counsel. Such
training sessions shall include education on the Initial Disclosure and Continuing Disclosure sections of this Debt
Management Policy, the City’s disclosure obligations under applicable federal and state securities laws and the
disclosure responsibilities and potential liabilities of members of the City’s staff and members of the City Council.
Such training sessions may be conducted using a recorded presentation.
Page 534 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 11
Section 11: Glossary
Ad Valorem Tax: A tax calculated “according to the value” of property. Such a tax is based on the assessed
valuation of real property and a valuation of tangible personal property.
Amortization: The gradual reduction in principal of an outstanding debt based upon a specific repayment
schedule, which details specific dates and repayment amounts on those dates.
Arbitrage: The gain that may be obtained by borrowing funds at a lower (often tax-exempt) rate and investing the
proceeds at higher (often taxable) rates. The ability to earn arbitrage by issuing tax-exempt securities has been
severely curtailed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
Assessed Valuation: The appraised worth of property as set by a taxing authority through assessments for
purposes of ad valorem taxation
Bond: A security that represents an obligation to pay a specified amount of money on a specific date in the future,
typically with periodic interest payments.
Bond Anticipation Notes: Short-term notes issued usually for capital projects and paid from the proceeds of the
issuance of long-term bonds. Provide interim financing in anticipation of bond issuance.
Bond Counsel: A specialized, qualified attorney retained by the issuer to give a legal opinion concerning the
validity of securities. The bond counsel’s opinion usually addresses the subject of tax exemption. Bond counsel
may prepare or review and advise the issuer regarding authorizing resolutions, trust indentures and litigation.
Bond Insurance: A type of credit enhancement whereby an insurance company indemnifies an investor against
default by the issuer. In the event of failure by the issuer to pay principal and interest in full and on time, investors
may call upon the insurance company to do so. Once issued, the municipal bond insurance policy is generally
irrevocable. The insurance company receives its premium when the policy is issued and this premium is typically
paid out of the bond issue.
Call Option: The right to redeem a bond prior to its stated maturity, either on a given date or continuously. The
call option is also referred to as the optional redemption provision. Often a call premium is added to the call
option as compensation to the holders of the earliest bonds called.
Capital Appreciation Bond: A municipal security on which the investment return on an initial principal amount is
reinvested at a stated compounded rate until maturity, at which time the investor receives a single payment
representing both the initial principal amount and the total investment return.
CDIAC: California Debt and Advisory Commission (“CDIAC”)
Certificates of Participation: A financial instrument representing a proportionate interest in payments such as
lease payments by one party (such as a city acting as a lessee) to another party (often a trustee).
Competitive Sale: A sale of bonds in which an underwriter or syndicate of underwriters submit sealed bids to
purchase the bonds. Bids are awarded on a true interest cost basis (TIC), providing that other bidding
requirements are satisfied. Competitive sales are recommended for simple financings with a strong underlying
credit rating. This type of sale is in contrast to a Negotiated Sale
Page 535 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 12
Continuing Disclosure: The requirement by the Securities and Exchange Commission for most issuers of municipal
debt to post current financial information and notices of enumerated events on the MSRB’s EMMA website for
access by the general marketplace.
Credit Rating Agency: A company that rates the relative credit quality of a bond issue and assigns a letter rating.
These rating agencies include Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s, and Fitch Ratings.
Debt Limit: The maximum amount of debt that is legally permitted by applicable charter, constitution, or statutes.
Debt Service: The amount necessary to pay principal and interest requirements on outstanding bonds for a given
year or series of years.
Default: The failure to pay principal or interest in full or on time and, in some cases, the failure to comply with
non-payment obligations after notice and the opportunity to cure.
Derivative: A financial instrument which derives its own value from the value of another instrument, usually an
underlying asset such as a stock, bond, or an underlying reference such as an interest rate index.
Disclosure Counsel: A specialized, qualified attorney retained to provide advice on issuer disclosure obligations, to
prepare the official statement and to prepare the continuing disclosure undertaking.
Discount: The difference between a bond’s par value and the price for which it is sold when the latter is less than
par. Also known as “underwriter discount,” this is the fee paid to the underwriter its banking and bond marketing
services.
EMMA System: Electronic Municipal Markey Access: Website created to provide information about municipal
bonds, bond prices and market trends to the public. Bond covenants typically require the city’s financial
information be timely submitted to EMMA.
Enterprise Activity: revenue generating project or business. The project often provides funds necessary to pay
debt service on securities issued to finance the facility. Common examples include water and solid waste
enterprises
Financing Team: The working group of City staff and outside consultants necessary to complete a debt issuance.
General Obligation (GO) Bond: A bond secured by an unlimited property tax pledge. Requires a two-thirds vote
by the electorate. GO bonds usually achieve lower rates of interest than other financing instruments since they
are considered to be a lower risk.
Indenture: A contract between the issuer and the trustee stipulating the characteristics of the financial
instrument, the issuer’s obligation to pay debt service, and the remedies available to the trustee in the event of
default.
Issuance Costs: The costs incurred by the bond issuer during the planning and sale of securities. These costs
include by are not limited to municipal financial advisory, bond counsel, disclosure counsel, printing, advertising
costs, credit enhancement, rating agencies fees, and other expenses incurred in the marketing of an issue.
Lease: An obligation wherein a lessee agrees to make payments to a lessor in exchange for the use of certain
property. The term may refer to a capital lease or to an operating lease.
Page 536 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 13
Lease Revenue Bonds: Bonds that are secured by an obligation of one party to make annual lease payments to
another.
Maturity Date: The date upon which a specified amount of debt principal or bonds matures, or becomes due and
payable by the issuer of the debt.
Municipal Financial Advisor: A consultant who provides the issuer with advice on the structure of the bond issue,
timing, terms and related matters for a new bond issue.
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB): A self-regulating organization established on September 5, 1975
upon the appointment of a 15-member board by the Securities and Exchange Agreement. The MSRB, comprised
of representatives from investment banking firms, dealer bank representatives, and public representatives, is
entrusted with the responsibility of writing rules of conduct for the municipal securities market. The MSRB hosts
the EMMA website, which hosts information posted by issuers under their continuing disclosure undertakings.
Negotiated Sale: A sale of securities in which the terms of the sale are determined through negotiation between
the issuer and the purchaser, typically an underwriter, without competitive bidding. The negotiated sales process
provides control over the financing structure and issuance timing. Negotiated sales are recommended for unusual
financing terms, period of market volatility and weaker credit quality. A thorough evaluation, usually with the
assistance of the City’s Municipal Financial Advisor, of the proposed bond’s credit characteristics in conjunction
with market conditions will be performed to ensure reasonable final pricing and underwriting spread.
Official Statement (Prospectus): A document published by the issuer in connection with a primary offering of
securities that discloses material information on a new security issue including the purposes of the issue, how the
securities will be repaid, and the financial, economic and social characteristics of the security for the bonds.
Investors may use this information to evaluate the credit quality of the securities.
Par Value: The face value or principal amount of a security.
Pension Obligation Bonds: Financing instruments used to pay some or all of the unfunded pension liability of a
pension plan. POBs are issued as taxable instruments over a 10-40 year term or by matching the term with the
amortization period of the outstanding unfunded actuarial accrued liability.
Premium: The excess of the price at which a bond is sold over its face value.
Present Value: The value of a future amount or stream of revenues or expenditures.
Pricing Consultant: The Pricing Consultant provides a fairness letter to the City or its agent regarding the pricing of
a new issue of municipal securities.
Private Placement: A bond issue that is structured specifically for one purchaser. Private placements are typically
carried out when extraneous circumstances preclude public offerings. A private placement is considered to be a
negotiated sale.
Redemption: Depending on an issue’s call provisions, an issuer may on certain dates and at certain premiums,
redeem or call specific outstanding maturities. When a bond or certificate is redeemed, the issuer is required to
pay the maturities’ par value, the accrued interest to the call date, plus any premium required by the issue’s call
provisions.
Refunding: A procedure whereby an issuer refinances an outstanding debt issue by issuing a new debt issue.
Page 537 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 14
Rule 15c2-12: Rule adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission setting forth certain obligations of (i)
underwriters to receive, review and disseminate official statements prepared by issuers of most primary offering
of municipal securities, (ii) underwriters to obtain continuing disclosure agreements from issuers and other
obligated persons to provide ongoing annual financial information on a continuing basis, and (iii) broker-dealers to
have access to such continuing disclosure in order to make recommendations of municipal securities in the
secondary market.
Reserve Fund: A fund established by the indenture of a bond issue into which money is deposited for payment of
debt service in case of a shortfall in current revenues.
Revenue Bond: A bond which is payable from a specific source of revenue and to which the full faith and credit of
an issuer is not pledged. Revenue bonds are payable from identified sources of revenue, and do not permit the
bondholders to compel a jurisdiction to pay debt service from any other source. Pledged revenues often are
derived from the operation of an enterprise.
Secondary Market: The market in which bonds are sold after their initial sale in the new issue market.
Serial Bonds: Bonds of an issue that mature in consecutive years or other intervals and are not subject to
mandatory sinking fund provisions.
Special Tax Bonds: Bonds issued to fund eligible improvements and paid with special taxes levied in a community
facilities district formed under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, or other applicable
law.
State Revolving Funds: The State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan is a low interest loan program for the construction of
water infrastructure projects.
Tax Allocation Bonds: Historically, tax allocation bonds referred to bonds issued under the Community
Redevelopment Law to fund eligible capital facilities located within a redevelopment project area. However, as a
result of the passage of AB X1 26, the [CITY] Redevelopment Agency has been dissolved and the successor agency’s
obligations are limited to performing certain enforceable obligations. The California Legislature has enacted a
number of laws that establish alternative tax increment financing mechanisms, and tax allocation bonds may be
issued under these laws in the future.
Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANS): Short term notes issued in anticipation of receiving tax receipts and
revenues within a fiscal year. TRANs allow the municipality to manage the period of cash shortfalls resulting from
a mismatch between timing of revenues and timing of expenditures.
Term Bonds: Bonds that come due in a single maturity but where the issuer may agree to make periodic payments
into a sinking fund for mandatory redemption of term bonds before maturity and for payment at maturity.
True Interest Cost (TIC): Under this method of computing the interest expense to the issuer of bonds, true interest
cost is defined as the rate necessary to discount the amounts payable on the respective principal and interest
payment dates to the purchase price received for the new issue of bonds. Interest is assumed to be compounded
semi-annually. TIC computations produce a figure slightly different from the net interest cost (NIC) method
because TIC considers the time value of money while NIC does not.
Page 538 of 550
CITY OF UKIAH DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICY
Date: February 15, 2017 15
Trustee: A bank retained by the issuer as custodian of bond proceeds and official representative of bondholders.
The trustee ensures compliance with the indenture. In many cases, the trustee also acts as paying agent and is
responsible for transmitting payments of interest and principal to the bondholders.
Underwriter: A broker-dealer that purchases a new issue of municipal securities from the issuer for resale in a
primary offering. The bonds may be purchased either through a negotiated sale with the issuer or through a
competitive sale.
Yield: The net rate of return, as a percentage, received by an investor on an investment. Yield calculations on a
fixed income investment, such as a bond issue, take purchase price and coupon into account when calculating yield
to maturity.
Revision Tracking:
Implemented: February 15, 2017
Revised: June 16,May X 2021
Page 539 of 550
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No: 12.c.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2020-669
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Update on Emergency Repair of the Yosemite Drive Water Main and Determine that Emergency
Conditions Continue to Require the Emergency Repair.
DEPARTMENT: Public Works PREPARED BY: Jarod Thiele, Public Works Management Analyst
PRESENTER: Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 2020-63 Yosemite Drive Water Main Emergency Work
Summary: The City Council will review the status of the emergency award of contract to repair the Yosemite
Drive Water Main, to comply with Public Contract Code Section 22050.
Background: At their regular meeting of November 4, 2020, the City Council voted to adopt a resolution
finding that emergency conditions would not allow sufficient time to publicly bid the repair of the Yosemite
Drive Water Main. Please refer to Attachment 1 for a copy of the resolution.
The City Council awarded a contract to Wipf Construction under Public Contract Code Section 22050 to repair
the Yosemite Drive Water Main. That section allows such repairs without competitive bidding in an emergency,
if the City Council on a 4/5 vote makes specified finding. However, please note, that staff solicited quotes from
two additional companies before making the award recommendation.
Discussion: Under Public Contract Code 22050, Subsection (c)(1) the City Council is required to review the
emergency action taken on November 4th at every regularly scheduled meeting thereafter until the action is
terminated.
In reviewing the action, the City Council must determine whether the emergency conditions excusing
competitive bidding continue for the repair of the Yosemite Drive Water Main. It must make that finding by a
4/5 vote.
The water main, water services, and trench paving work are complete. The final work to reconstruct the
portion of the street damaged by the repeated water main breaks will commence as soon as weather and
contractor availability permit.
Recommended Action: Determine that emergency conditions continue to require the repair of the Yosemite
Drive Water Main without competitive bidding.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Mary Horger, Financial Services
Manager
Page 540 of 550
Page 2 of 2
Page 541 of 550
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-63
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPROVING PURSUANT TO
PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 22050 THE EMERGENCY PROCUREMENT WITHOUT
PUBLIC BIDDING OF CONSTRUCTION SERVICES TO REPAIR THE WATER MAIN ON
YOSEMITE DRIVE
WHEREAS:
1.During normal operation of the City of Ukiah’s Water Distribution System, a portion of water
main failed repeatedly on Yosemite Drive; and
2.Without the normal operation of this water main, the City is unable to provide necessary and
immediate services to its residents which could lead to public health hazards; and
3.With damage caused to public property including streets, curb, gutter; and
4.With damage caused to private property including driveway aprons and driveways; and
5.The City Engineer estimates that it would take 120 days to develop plans and specifications to
bid the construction work required to repair the water main and damaged public and private
property, to advertise requests for bids, to award the bid and to commence construction and an
additional 2-3 weeks to complete the work; and
6.Under Public Contract Code Section 22050(a)(1) in the case of an emergency, the City,
pursuant to a four-fifths vote of the City Council, may repair or replace a public facility and
procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for those purposes, without giving
notice for bids to let contracts; and
7.Under Public Contract Code Section 22050(a)(2) before the City Council takes such action, it
must make a finding, based on substantial evidence set forth in the minutes of its meeting, that
the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids, and that
the action is necessary to respond to the emergency;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1.Based on the foregoing recitals and information, the City Council finds that an emergency condition
exists that must be repaired to avoid public health hazards that could result, if the repair work was
put out for competitive bids in compliance with the procedures required by the Uniform Construction
Cost Accounting Act.
2.The City Council authorizes the procurement of construction services to repair the water main and
damaged public and private property without providing notice inviting bids.
3.The City Council authorizes the City Procurement Officer to contract with Wipf Construction to repair
the backwash basins at the WTP on the amount of $178,642.
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 542 of 550
2
4.Awarding a contract to repair the water main and damaged public and private property is
categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act as
a Class 2 categorical exemption, because it involves the replacement or reconstruction of existing
utility systems and/or facilities involving negligible or no expansion of capacity. (14 CCR §15302.)
5.The emergency action taken by this resolution shall terminate upon the City Council’s approval of a
certificate of completion for the water main and public and private property repair work.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November, 2020, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Douglas F. Crane, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Councilmembers Mulheren, Brown, Scalmanini, Orozco, and Mayor Crane
None
None
None
Page 543 of 550
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item No: 13.a.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2021-926
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Response to Correspondence from the County of Mendocino Regarding
Project Homekey 2.0.
DEPARTMENT: City Manager /
Admin PREPARED BY: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
PRESENTER: Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. County of Mendocino Ltr 5-27-21 Project Homekey 2.0
Summary: Consideration of a response to correspondence from the County of Mendocino regarding Project
Homekey 2.0.
Background: The City Manager's Office received correspondence from the County CEO on June 1, 2021,
regarding Project HomeKey 2.0 (Attachment #1).
Discussion: The item has been added to the agenda to provide an opportunity for the City Council to discuss
and consider a response.
Recommended Action: Discuss and provide direction regarding a response
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
Page 544 of 550
Page 545 of 550
Page 546 of 550
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item No: 13.b.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 6/16/2021
ITEM NO: 2019-62
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Receive Updates on City Council Committee and Ad Hoc Assignments, and, if Necessary,
Consider Modifications to Assignments and/or the Creation/Elimination of Ad Hoc(s).
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk PREPARED BY: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
PRESENTER: Mayor Orozco and Various Councilmembers
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2021 City Council Special Assignments
Summary: City Council members will provide reports and updates on their committee and ad hoc
assignments. If necessary, the Council may consider modifications.
Background: City Council members are assigned to a number of committees and ad hoc activities. These
assignments are included as Attachment 1.
Discussion: Previously, the City Council discussed having more time allocated to reporting on committee and
ad hoc activities. Often, the Council Reports section of the regular agenda is rushed due to impending
business (i.e., public hearings), and not enough time is afforded for reports beyond community activities.
In an effort to foster regular updates on committee and ad hoc assignments, this item is being placed on the
agenda to provide the City Council members an expanded opportunity to report on assignments and modify
assignments as necessary.
Recommended Action: Receive report(s). The Council will consider modifications to committee and ad hoc
assignments along with the creation/elimination ad hoc(s).
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
Page 547 of 550
2021 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS
COUNTY/REGIONAL
OnGoing One + Alternate MTG DATE/TIME MEETING LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT
Disaster Council
Shall meet a
minimum of once a
year at a time and
place designated
upon call of the chair
Place designated upon call of the
chair or, if she/he is unavailable or
unable to call such meeting, the
first vice chair and then the City
Manager or her/his designee.
Office of Emergency Management
300 Seminary Ave.
Ukiah, CA 95482
467-5765 - Tami Bartolomei
Develop any necessary emergency and mutual aid
plans, agreements, ordinances, resolutions, rules,
and regulations.
Orozco
Duenas- Alternate
Tami Bartolomei, Office of Emergency
Management Coordinator; 467-5765
tbartolomei@cityofukiah.com
Greater Ukiah Business & Tourism
Alliance
3rd Tuesday of
month, 11:30 a.m.
200 S School St.
Ukiah, CA 95482
200 S School St.
Ukiah, CA 95482
Promotes tourism and works to strengthen and
promote the historic downtown and businesses within
the greater Ukiah area
Duenas
Rodin - Alternate
Shannon Riley,Deputy City Manager;
467-5793 sriley@cityofukiah.com
Mendocino Council of Governments
(MCOG)
1st Monday of month,
1:30 p.m.
Board of Supervisors Chambers
501 Low Gap Road
Ukiah, CA
Executive Director
367 N. State Street, Ste. 206
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-1859
Plan and allocate State funding, transportation,
infrastructure and project County wide
Brown
Rodin- Alternate
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City
Engineer; 463-6280
teriksen@cityofukiah.com
Mendocino County Inland Water and
Power Commission (IWPC)
2nd Thursday of
month, 6:00 p.m.
Civic Center
300 Seminary Avenue
conference room 5
IWPC Staff
P.O. Box 1247
Ukiah, CA 95482
391-7574 - Candace Horsley
Develops coordination for water resources and
current water rights: Potter Valley project - Eel River
Diversion
Orozco
Brown- Alternate
Sean White,Director of Water Resources;
463-5712 swhite@cityofukiah.com
Mendocino Solid Waste Management
Authority (MSWMA)
3rd Thursday of
every other month
(varies), 10:00 a.m.
Willits Council Chambers
Solid Waste Director
3200 Taylor Drive
Ukiah, CA 95482
468-9710
County-wide Solid Waste JPA Brown
Duenas- Alternate
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City
Engineer; 463-6280
teriksen@cityofukiah.com
Mendocino Transit Authority (MTA)
Board of Directors
Last Wednesday of
month, 1:30 p.m.
Alternating locations - Ukiah
Conference Center or Fort Bragg,
or Point Arena
Executive Director
241 Plant Road
Ukiah, CA 95482
462-1422
County-wide bus transportation issues and funding Duenas
Orozco - Alternate
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City
Engineer; 463-6280
teriksen@cityofukiah.com
North Coast Opportunities (NCO)4th Wednesday of
month, 2 p.m.
Alternating locations - Ukiah and
Lakeport
Ross Walker, Governing Board
Chair
North Coast Opportunities
413 North State Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
Assist low income and disadvantaged people to
become self reliant
Bartolomei
(appointed 12/19/18)
Tami Bartolomei, Community Services
Administrator; 467-5765
tbartolomei@cityofukiah.com
North Coast Rail Authority (NCRA)2nd Wednesday of
month, 10:30 a.m.Various Locations - announced
419 Talmage Road, Suite M
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-3280
Provides a unified and revitalized rail infrastructure
meeting the freight and passenger needs of the
region
Shannon Riley, Deputy
City Manager Shannon Riley,Deputy City Manager;
467-5793 sriley@cityofukiah.com
Russian River Watershed Association
(RRWA)
4th Thursday of
month, 9:00 a.m.
(only 5 times a year)
Windsor Town Hall
Russian River Watershed Association
Attn: Daria Isupov
425 South Main St., Sebastopol, CA
95472
508-3670
Consider issues related to Russian river - plans
projects and funding requests
Rodin
Brown- Alternate
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City
Engineer; 463-6280
teriksen@cityofukiah.com
Ukiah Valley Basin Groundwater
Sustainability Agency (GSA)
2nd Thursday of
month, 1:30 p.m.
Board of Supervisors Chambers;
501 Low Gap Road
Ukiah, CA
County Executive Office
Nicole French
501 Low Gap Rd., Rm. 1010
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-4441
GSA serves as the Groundwater Sustainability
Agency in the Ukiah Valley basin
Crane
Duenas- Alternate
Sean White, Director of Water Resources;
463-5712 swhite@cityofukiah.com
COUNTY/REGIONAL
One + Staff Alternate MTG DATE/TIME MEETING LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT
Economic Development & Financing
Corporation (EDFC)
2nd Thursday of
month, 2:00 p.m.
Primarily 631 S. Orchard Street
(location varies)
Executive Director
631 South Orchard Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
467-5953
Multi-agency co-op for economic development and
business loan program
Riley
(appointed 12/19/18)
Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager;
467-5793 sriley@cityofukiah.com
Sun House Guild ex officio 2nd Tuesday of
month, 4:30 p.m.
Sun House
431 S. Main St.
Ukiah, CA
431 S. Main Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
467-2836
Support and expand Grace Hudson Museum Orozco
Neil Davis- Alternate
David Burton, Museum Director; 467-2836
dburton@cityofukiah.com
Continued -
COUNTY/REGIONAL
One + Staff Alternate
MTG DATE/TIME MEETING LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT
Mendocino Youth Project JPA Board
of Directors
3rd Wednesday of
month, 7:45 a.m.
776 S. State Street Conference
Room
Mendocino Co. Youth Project
776 S. State Street, Ste. 107
Ukiah, CA 95482
707-463-4915
Targets all youth with a focus on drug and alcohol
prevention, healthy alternatives and empowering
youth to make healthy choices
Cedric Crook, Patrol
Lieutenant
Cedric Crook, Patrol Lieutenant Nob; 463-
6771; ccrook@cityofukiah.com
Northern California Power Agency
(NCPA)
4th Thursday of
month, 9:00 a.m.
(see NCPA calendar)
Roseville, CA
and other locations
651 Commerce Drive
Roseville, CA 95678
916-781-4202
Pool of public utilities for electric generation and
dispatch
Crane
Grandi - Alternate
Mel Grandi, Electric Utility Director;
463-6295 mgrandi@cityofukiah.com
1 5/20/2021
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 548 of 550
2021 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS
LOCAL/COUNTY/REGIONAL/LIASONS
OnGoing One or Two Council and/or
Staff
MTG DATE/TIME LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT
Adventist Health Community Advisory
Council
Quarterly:
Aug. 27, 6:45 a.m.
Nov 5, 6:45 a.m.
275 Hospital Drive
Ukiah, CA 95482
275 Hospital Drive
Ukiah, CA 95482
707-463-7623
Allyne Brown -
Allyne.Brown@ah.org
Provides the Adventist Health Ukiah Valley (AHUV)
Governing Board and Administration with advice,
support, and suggestions on matter of importance to
Mendocino, Lake and Sonoma Counties.
Brown
Rodin - Alternate
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk, 463-6217
klawler@cityofukiah.com
League of California Cities Redwood
Empire Legislative Committee
Prior to Division
Meetings, meets 3x
in person and then
via conference call
Various locations that are
announced
Redwood Empire League
President;
Public Affairs Program Manager
(916) 658-8243
Elected city officials and professional city staff attend
division meetings throughout the year to share what
they are doing and advocate for their interests in
Sacramento
Rodin
Orozco-Alternate
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager; 463-6221
ssangiacomo@cityofukiah.com
City Selection Committee
Called as required by
the Clerk of the
Board
BOS Conference Room
501 Low Gap Rd. Rm. 1090
Ukiah, CA
C/O: BOS
501 Low Gap Rd., Rm 1090
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-4441
Makes appointments to LAFCO and Airport Land Use
Commission Mayor Kristine Lawler, City Clerk; 463-6217
klawler@cityofukiah.com
Investment Oversight Committee Varies
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.
Ukiah, CA 95482
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.
Ukiah, CA 95482
Reviews City investments, policies, and strategies
Crane
Orozco, Alternate
Alan Carter, Treasurer
Dan Buffalo, Director of Finance; 463-6220
dbuffalo@cityofukiah.com
Library Advisory Board
3rd Wednesdays of
alternate months;
1:00 p.m.
Various Mendocino County
Libraries
Ukiah County Library
463-4491 Review library policy and activities Supervisor Mulheren Kristine Lawler, City Clerk; 463-6217;
klawler@cityofukiah.com
Ukiah Players Theater Board of
Directors
3rd Tuesday of
month, 6:00 p.m
1041 Low Gap Rd
Ukiah, CA 95482
462-1210
1041 Low Gap Rd
Ukiah, CA 95482
462-1210
To oversee the activities, organization and purpose
of the Ukiah Players Theater
Greg Owen, Airport
Manager
(appointed 12/19/18)
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk; 463-6217
klawler@cityofukiah.com
Ukiah Unified School District (UUSD)
Committee Quarterly 511 S. Orchard, Ste. D
Ukiah, CA 95482
511 S. Orchard
Ukiah, CA 95482
Information exchange with UUSD Board Chair,
Mayor, Superintendent, and City Manager
Mayor, City Manager and
Police Chief
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager; 463-6221
ssangiacomo@cityofukiah.com
Russian River Flood Control District
(RRFCD) Liaison
1st Monday of month,
5:30 p.m.
151 Laws Ave.,Suite D
Ukiah, CA
151 Laws Ave., Ukiah, CA 95482;
rrfc@pacific.net; 462-5278
Proactively manage the water resources of the upper
Russian River for the benefit of the people and
environment of Mendocino County
White/Orozco Sean White, Director of Water Resources;
463-5712 swhite@cityofukiah.com
HHSA Advisory Board 2nd Wednesday of
month; 9:00 a.m.
Big Sur Room
County Department of Social
Services
Executive Director
Jackie Williams - 462-1934
c/o Ford St. Project
139 Ford St.
Ukiah CA 95482
Discussions and possible work on health and human
service issues Brown - Liaison Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager; 467-
5793 sriley@cityofukiah.com
Mendocino County Local Area
Formation Commission (LAFCO)
1st Monday of month,
9:00 a.m.Board of Supervisors Chambers
Executive Director
200 S. School Street, Ste. 2
Ukiah, CA 95482
463-4470
Required by legislation - planning spheres of
influence, annexation, service areas, and special
districts
(positions not active)
Crane
Rodin
Craig Schlatter, Director of Community
Development; 463-6219;
cschlatter@cityofukiah.com
Mendocino County Airport Land Use
Commission As needed
BOS Conference Room
501 Low Gap Rd., Rm. 1090,
Ukiah, CA
Mendocino County Executive Office
501 Low Gap Rd. Rm. 1010
Ukiah, CA 95482
To formulate a land use compatibility plan, provide
for the orderly growth of the airport and the
surrounding area, and safeguard the general welfare
of the inhabitants within the vicinity
Owen/Schlatter
Greg Owen, Airport Manager; 467-2855;
gowen@cityofukiah.com
Craig Schlatter, Director of Community
Development; 463-6219;
cschlatter@cityofukiah.com
Mendocino County 1st District Liaison Monthly; TBD
Civic Center Annex
conference room #5
411 West Clay St.
Ukiah, CA 95482
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.
Ukiah, CA 95482
To coordinate activities and policy development with
the City's 1st District Supervisor
Brown
Crane- Alternate
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager;
463-6221; ssangiacomo@cityofukiah.com
Mendocino County 2nd District Liaison 1st Wednesdays of
month, 8:00 a.m.
Civic Center Annex
conference room #5
411 West Clay St.
Ukiah, CA 95482
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.
Ukiah, CA 95482
To coordinate activities and policy development with
the County's 2nd District Supervisor Brown Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager; 467-
5793 sriley@cityofukiah.com
LOCAL/COUNTY/REGIONAL/LIASONS
OnGoing One or Two Council and/or
Staff
MTG DATE/TIME LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT
Fire Executive Committee 2nd Wednesdays of
month, 3:45 p.m.
Ukiah Valley Conference Center,
200 S. School Street
Ukiah, CA
Stephanie Abba
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.
Ukiah, CA 95482
sabba@cityofukiah.com
Per the recently adopted agreement between the City
of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley Fire Protection District Orozco/Brown
Doug Hutchison, Fire Chief; 463-6263;
dhutchison@cityofukiah.com
STANDING COMMITTEES MTG DATE/TIME LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS/CONTACT COMMITTEE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT
Equity and Diversity TBD Virtual Meeting Room
(link to be created)
Civic Center
300 Seminary Ave.
Ukiah, CA 95482
Improve diversity and equity in the City’s workforce
and municipal services Orozco/Duenas
Traci Boyl, City Manager's Office
Management Analyst; 467-5720
tboyl@cityofukiah.com
2 5/20/2021
Page 549 of 550
COMMITTEE ASSIGNED TO PRINCIPAL STAFF SUPPORT
Electric Grid Operational Improvements Crane/Orozco Mel Grandi, Electric Utility Director;
463-6295 mgrandi@cityofukiah.com
Trench Cut Policy Development Crane/Brown Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer;
463-6280 teriksen@cityofukiah.com
Budget Development Best Practices and
Financial Policy For FY 21/22 Budget Crane/Brown
Dan Buffalo, Director of Finance;
463-6220 dbuffalo@cityofukiah.com
Sheri Mannion, Human Resource Director/Risk
Manager; 463-6272, smannion@cityofukiah.com
Advance Planning & Policy for Sphere of
Influence (SOI), Municipal Service Review (MSR),
Annexation, Tax Sharing, Detachment, and Out
of Area Service Agreements
Crane/Rodin
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
463-6221 ssangiacomo@cityofukiah.com
Shannon Riley, Deputy City Manager
467-5793 sriley@cityofukiah.com
Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director
463-6219 cschlatter@cityofukiah.com
Sean White, Director of Water Resources;
463-5712 swhite@cityofukiah.com
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer;
463-6280 teriksen@cityofukiah.com
Mel Grandi, Electric Utility Director;
463-6295 mgrandi@cityofukiah.com
Dan Buffalo, Director of Finance; 463-6220
dbuffalo@cityofukiah.com
2021 Electric Rate Study Crane/Duenas Mel Grandi, Electric Utility Director; 463‐6295
mgrandi@cityofukiah.com
Housing Element and Implementation Review Rodin/Orozco Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director
463-6219 cschlatter@cityofukiah.com
Planning Commissioner Appointment Process Crane/Rodin
Craig Schlatter,Community Development Director
463‐6219 cschlatter@cityofukiah.com
Darcy Vaughn, Assistant City Attorney
462‐6846 dvaughn@cityofukiah.onmicrosoft.com
UVSD/ City Relations
Ad hoc committee to address specific issues with the
Ukiah Valley Sanitation District, including discussion of
overall sewer system service delivery policies, operating
policy revisions, potential revisions to the current
Operating Agreement, and cost sharing
Crane/Brown
Dan Buffalo, Director of Finance;
463‐6220 dbuffalo@cityofukiah.com
Sean White, Water Resources Director
463‐5712 swhite@cityofukiah.com
Upper Russian River Water Agency/City
Relations Crane/Brown Sean White, Director of Water Resources;
463‐5712 swhite@cityofukiah.com
2021 AD HOC COMMITTEES
3 4/16/2021
Page 550 of 550